Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 156
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney Upper North Shore
    Posts
    4,459

    Default Flattening the end of the cap iron so it sits flush with the blade

    Are we looking at the entire flattened section (say 2mm deep?) to sit flush with the blade or just the front edge? Iíve seen both methods talked about.
    i see just having the front edge sitting flat on the blade easier to accomplish that the entire surface.

    F7310AF3-92B2-43B6-BAB3-DCD0A8998071.jpg

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





     
  3. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Brisbane (western suburbs)
    Age
    77
    Posts
    12,033

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cklett View Post
    ÖÖ. There seems to be some anxiety around fitting lever caps and I do not understand why. Maybe because I have not done that yet myself. So maybe someone can elaborate a bit more on the pit falls when it comes to lever caps?....
    The problem I have is setting out the holes in the sides for the cross-pin or screws accurately. Some people drill these before attaching the sides, but I find I can never fit each side perfectly. I set them out very carefully, but in the process of cutting & fitting each side, one always ends up a teeny bit off where it should have been, sometimes half a mm in front or behind the other. That would skew the pin if the holes had been pre-drilled, so I prefer to fit it after peening up the sides. Setting out on a square-sided plane is pretty straightforward, but it gets trickier for round-sided planes.

    Not sure why you want to fit your lever-caps the way you plan, Matt & Brad, but they're your planes & you should do it the way you want! My thoughts are that the LC needs to fit very accurately. It will be difficult to make a deadly- accurate slot in the LC with hacksaw & files (EDIT: I should've said it would be more difficult for me, compared with setting the LC in a vise on the DP & drilling the pin/screw holes - but not impossible and perhaps even easy for a skilled metalworker), but drilling an accurate cross-pin hole is taxing enough for me!. However, if the slot is a little "off" you should be able to get it to sit straight with a bit of careful filing when you are fettling it all.

    I use 'cheesehead' type screws to pivot the LC. Screws with 6.5mm heads & 6mm threads are standing up well in my large panel planes. For the smaller smoothers, I used 5mm screws with either 5.5 or 6mm heads, and even 3mm screws on the little thumb planes.

    Spiers & Mathieson & Norris all used cross-pins peened into the sides. I don't know why they chose this method, it's tricky to do & all too easy to end up with the LC too tight after peening the pin. The main reason I prefer screws is because it's easy to remove & replace the LC, something I always end up doing several times in the final fettling, when getting the LC sitting nicely on the blade or cap-iron. Having a 'loose' LC as you propose will make that even easier.

    Another reason why I always wait 'til last to fit my LCs is because just about every plane I've made so far was a 'prototype'. Although I always start out with a plan & an accurate scale drawing, I frequently change my mind about what blade or chipbreaker I use, or the stuffing ends up a little off the sweet spot & in tidying it up, the blade angle gets changed a little. All of these can alter the ideal position for the pivot point a bit.

    Lastly, imo, where you set the pivot point on the LC isn't super-critical. Lever-cap crews can apply a lot of force, so unless your pivot point is very heavily biased toward the screw side, you can usually apply far more pressure on the business end than it really needs. In fact, we tend to apply more pressure than necessary with screwed lever caps. We generally set our Bailey type LCs to put quite a bit less pressure when clipped down. I do like to keep the LC as thick as possible around the pivot, since it comes under a fair bit of strain.

    Cheers,
    IW

  4. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Brisbane (western suburbs)
    Age
    77
    Posts
    12,033

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lappa View Post
    ….i see just having the front edge sitting flat on the blade easier to accomplish that the entire surface.

    F7310AF3-92B2-43B6-BAB3-DCD0A8998071.jpg
    Lappa, how you've drawn the lower sketch is what I aim for when making a cap-iron or fettling an old one. Under-cutting the leading edge makes it far easier to get a clean, straight edge to mate with the blade. Also, when you tighten the lever-cap down, the cap-iron flattens a little & the leading edge will be pushed forward slightly, but by having it under-cut a little, it remains tight against the blade. (You've drawn it with a very pronounced under-cut for clarity, but bit doesn't need a lot, just enough to ensure the contact is only along the leading edge)..

    Cheers,
    IW

  5. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    6,928

    Default

    After due consideration meaning, I slept on it.
    I shall put forward my thoughts on a Hung lever Cap

    The normal method I see is to attach the pivot points on the sides of the plane,
    The Lever cap, then only pivot on these two set points,or rotate on its axis.

    Meaning the contact point on the blade must be in parallel with the pivot point.


    If the Lever Cap is made to float on top of the cross bar,It will find its own natural pivot position,
    Especially if it is only sitting on to bearing surfaces at the edges of the Lever Cap.
    The contact area of the Lever Cap will then not be so controlled by the Cross bar.
    And will hopefully be able to fully sit on the blade.
    With out being so controlled.

    A few machinist Chanelís I follow on YouTube (not that Iím a machinist by any stretch of the Imagination).
    Hammer home if you canít make something accurate make it adjustable.

    My other considerations are , I want the ďbodyĒ to be clear of fixings.
    I think it just makes the plane nicer looking.
    Hope that all makes sense.

    Cheers Matt.
    Ye I know I just have to have a go and see how it turns out,hence my R and D project

    Cheers Matt,
    Ps I could have this all completely wrong.

  6. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Brisbane (western suburbs)
    Age
    77
    Posts
    12,033

    Default

    I can't see any flaws in your reasoning, Matt.

    Indeed, fixing the LC with a through-pin does mean you have to work with a high degree of accuracy. You need to make sure the pin ends up parallel with the blade, and the hole through the lever cap is parallel with top & bottom surfaces of the LC & at right angles to it's ling axis so it swings in the correct arc and the end remains parrallel to the blade-bed when it's rotated. As long as you get these factors pretty close, it's easy enough to "adjust" the edge of the lever-cap until it bears evenly right across the cap-iron (or blade if you aren't using a cap-iron). That's where you put in a good effort during the fettling process: Fit LC. put in blade or blade/cap-iron assembly, tighten up, & see if you can get the finest blade of a feeler-gauge between the blade & blade-bed, and the LC & cap-iron. If a 1 thou blade won't slip in anywhere along either, you can take a bow & proceed to make some shavings. It sometimes takes me several assembly dis-assembly cycles to get everything seating perfectly, but getting those bits fitting snugly is vital if you want your plane to be a top performer.

    Hanging the LC on a fairly loose-fitting hook arrangement will allow a bit more "self-adjustment" and you won't have to be quite so accurate with your setting out & hole-drilling (but you'll still need to be pretty close or make your hook a very loose fit on the cross-pin to allow the LC to twist a bit as it's tightened).

    It has just occurred to me as I was typing that you could achieve the same ends with a through-pin - just make the hole in the LC fairly loose. You can still peen the ends of the pin & make it disappear, but a loose hole in the LC will allow a small amount of twist & self-adjustment as it's tightened up..

    My method of using a screw either side as pivots is a compromise that I find easier to do. By making the screw-heads a loose (but not sloppy) fit in the sides, there is a bit of room for twisting slightly as the LC seats. Any gap betwixt screw head & side is too small to see.

    But you should go with whatever method you feel comfortable with & reasonably confident you can carry off. You propsed system will give you the clean sides you desire, and a clean top face on the LC, like on the old Spiers and Norrises. I've looked hard at my A5 several times, & even with magnification, I cannot see so much as the faintest of lines to indicate where the cross-pin comes through. The chaps wielding the hammers on the Norris assembly-line knew their stuff, that's for sure!

    Cheers,
    IW

  7. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    6,928

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanW View Post
    I can't see any flaws in your reasoning, Matt.

    Indeed, fixing the LC with a through-pin does mean you have to work with a high degree of accuracy. You need to make sure the pin ends up parallel with the blade, and the hole through the lever cap is parallel with top & bottom surfaces of the LC & at right angles to it's ling axis so it swings in the correct arc and the end remains parrallel to the blade-bed when it's rotated. As long as you get these factors pretty close, it's easy enough to "adjust" the edge of the lever-cap until it bears evenly right across the cap-iron (or blade if you aren't using a cap-iron). That's where you put in a good effort during the fettling process: Fit LC. put in blade or blade/cap-iron assembly, tighten up, & see if you can get the finest blade of a feeler-gauge between the blade & blade-bed, and the LC & cap-iron. If a 1 thou blade won't slip in anywhere along either, you can take a bow & proceed to make some shavings. It sometimes takes me several assembly dis-assembly cycles to get everything seating perfectly, but getting those bits fitting snugly is vital if you want your plane to be a top performer.

    Hanging the LC on a fairly loose-fitting hook arrangement will allow a bit more "self-adjustment" and you won't have to be quite so accurate with your setting out & hole-drilling (but you'll still need to be pretty close or make your hook a very loose fit on the cross-pin to allow the LC to twist a bit as it's tightened).

    It has just occurred to me as I was typing that you could achieve the same ends with a through-pin - just make the hole in the LC fairly loose. You can still peen the ends of the pin & make it disappear, but a loose hole in the LC will allow a small amount of twist & self-adjustment as it's tightened up..

    My method of using a screw either side as pivots is a compromise that I find easier to do. By making the screw-heads a loose (but not sloppy) fit in the sides, there is a bit of room for twisting slightly as the LC seats. Any gap betwixt screw head & side is too small to see.

    But you should go with whatever method you feel comfortable with & reasonably confident you can carry off. You propsed system will give you the clean sides you desire, and a clean top face on the LC, like on the old Spiers and Norrises. I've looked hard at my A5 several times, & even with magnification, I cannot see so much as the faintest of lines to indicate where the cross-pin comes through. The chaps wielding the hammers on the Norris assembly-line knew their stuff, that's for sure!

    Cheers,
    I take that first line as due consideration to my awesomeness by the judges then.

    Cheers Matt.
    Just tripping over my ego lol.

  8. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Mt Waverley Vic 3149
    Age
    81
    Posts
    679

    Default

    I am proposing a "square" wooden pin . The wedge will contact the flat / parallel surfaces of both the pin and the blade. My blade is 6mm thick and I and not proposing to use a chip breaker.
    My theory is that, so long as the pin holes are located with a fair degree of accuracy, there should only be a need for minimal filing of the flat on the pin to ensure parallelism between the 3 components - blade, wedge and pin. (yes, the pin will have a round tenon on each end where it passes through the cheeks).

    I have a bit more CAD work to complete before I can upload a 'final' sketch, Do you have any words of wisdom before my sketch gets to the point where it would be easier to start again than incorporate major changes.

    Cheers
    Bob

  9. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Brisbane (western suburbs)
    Age
    77
    Posts
    12,033

    Default

    Bob, I take it from the round tenons that your pin will be able to rotate, which is how Krenov used to make his planes. It allows the pin to snug up to the top of the wedge nicely & get a better grip without causing marks on your wedge. The bridges in metal planes that use a wedge are often fitted so they can rotate too, but some aren't. Of course you will be trying hard to keep the bridge parallel with your blade bed, but if you end up with it slightly out of parallel, it's not a major catastrophe, you just shave a bit off one side of your wedge until there is even mating across it. I always start with a wedge a bit over-size to give me room for adjustments should it be necessary.

    Another 'trick' with wedges, is to scrape a very shallow concavity on the blade side, under the bridge or pin, to 'spring' it a little. This ensures you get pressure applied at the mouth end, where you need it most. It doesn't need much, just enough that the first 6-9mm of the wedge is making solid contact with the top of the blade.

    Cheers,
    IW

  10. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,025

    Default

    OGB

    I have only just picked up on this thread, but I purchased a wooden plane a while back that had a rotating "thingy" to retain the wedge. The original was made of plastic and an abomination, but the replacement metal part was successful. Some more information here. It might give those of you following this technique some ideas.

    Regards
    Paul
    Bushmiller;

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

  11. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Mt Waverley Vic 3149
    Age
    81
    Posts
    679

    Default

    Thanks for the info Paul. I still like the idea of all wood and may steal the design of your aluminum replacement part. I have some jarrah which should work, I think. If not I'll just have to make another one out of aluminium.

    Cheers
    Bob

  12. #26
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    6,928

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oldgreybeard View Post
    I am proposing a "square" wooden pin . The wedge will contact the flat / parallel surfaces of both the pin and the blade. My blade is 6mm thick and I and not proposing to use a chip breaker.
    My theory is that, so long as the pin holes are located with a fair degree of accuracy, there should only be a need for minimal filing of the flat on the pin to ensure parallelism between the 3 components - blade, wedge and pin. (yes, the pin will have a round tenon on each end where it passes through the cheeks).

    I have a bit more CAD work to complete before I can upload a 'final' sketch, Do you have any words of wisdom before my sketch gets to the point where it would be easier to start again than incorporate major changes.

    Cheers
    Bob
    A square bridge would give you some scope for being a little ďcreativeĒBob
    Maybe some scroll work or carving??

    Off course in the big scheme of things, I will naturally take all credit weíre due.

    Cheers Matt.

  13. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,025

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oldgreybeard View Post
    Thanks for the info Paul. I still like the idea of all wood and may steal the design of your aluminum replacement part. I have some jarrah which should work, I think. If not I'll just have to make another one out of aluminium.

    Cheers
    Bob
    Bob

    I only used aluminium because I had that metal, but no brass which is what I would have preferred. At the time I did not consider timber but that would clearly be another option if you have one of the strong dense hardwoods available.

    Regards
    Paul
    Bushmiller;

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

  14. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Brisbane (western suburbs)
    Age
    77
    Posts
    12,033

    Default

    How about a Cupid's bow? swivelling bridge.jpg

    This one has a simple wedge and the bridge swivels on single screws.

    When I fit a screw adjuster, this is not very convenient, you need to back off the pressure while you adjust the blade, and that is not so easy with a straight wedge. So I went over to a system with a fixed bridge & a thumbscrew to clamp the wedge, Like Norris used on his chariot & thumb planes with screw adjusters: 2 Parts.jpg

    The bridge in this case needs to remain fixed in position, which cn be done with a pair of screws on each side: Ebony infill chariot plane.jpg

    Or pinned in for the "look mum, no hands" finish: 4 Redone.jpg

    This all works really well on low-angle, bevel-up jobs, not sure if it could work on a bevel-down standard pitch or higher plane. Pigeon pr.jpg

    Cheers,
    IW

  15. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,025

    Default

    Ian

    I remember seeing a reference you made to a cupids bow in a thread of mine and it did not men much to me. I had meant to ask , but an indecent period of time elapsed and I left it alone. All is now clear.

    Thanks.

    Something that has become apparent to me in considering a bevel up plane is that because the angles are so different the same style of lever cap clamping might not be interchangeable. Once the blade is laid down at a low angle it is much more of a test for the clamp to resist the horizontal force of planing compared to, say, a high angle plane at 55į.

    Regards
    Paul
    Bushmiller;

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

  16. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    6,928

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bushmiller View Post
    Ian



    Thanks.

    Something that has become apparent to me in considering a bevel up plane is that because the angles are so different the same style of lever cap clamping might not be interchangeable. Once the blade is laid down at a low angle it is much more of a test for the clamp to resist the horizontal force of planing compared to, say, a high angle plane at 55į.

    Regards
    Paul

    Why,
    I understand what your saying Paul,
    But I donít understand why there would be any differences.
    If you put a piece of timber in your vice at a angle of 20 degrees or something.
    Then started planing it,
    Would the Lever Cap know any difference?

    Cheers Matt.





    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Agreeable Theory
    By Breslau in forum WOODIES JOKES
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 23rd August 2013, 10:07 PM
  2. Theory on work
    By Allan at Wallan in forum WOODIES JOKES
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 5th September 2011, 10:14 AM
  3. Lathe Bed Theory
    By brendan stemp in forum WOODTURNING - GENERAL
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 3rd January 2011, 09:37 PM
  4. The Buffalo Theory
    By Bazza in forum WOODIES JOKES
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 31st January 2002, 05:33 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
  •