DW Pgh
mean spiriteD
Registered: 04/16/07
Posts: 9503
|
|
CedarSlayer said:
DW Pgh said:
In a world where I can afford planes of various angles, though, I would rather choose the proper angle with a single iron and make the mouth tight instead of having to fiddle with the chipbreaker every single time I sharpen the plane.
I really hate that. It adds considerable aggravation to sharpening (who hasn't accidentally had the chipbreaker slip down over an iron edge when you're setting it really tight), just like it's annoyance to get chips between the chipbreaker and the iron when you're planing.
It's novel, but no thanks other than the rigidity it adds.
I think that your reasoning is quite sound. Planes without chip breakers were made and sold side by side with the chip breakers.
My hypothesis is that a plane set up for a specific task, was probably preferred and did not use a chip breaker. A simpler tool being better for a specific task.
For a travel kit, or for an apprentice, a chip breaker gave three or four planes in one, and allowed for economy of space, weight and cost. I suspect that the normal state for the chip breaker was back for pine and forward for hardwood. So when a chip breaker was engaged or brought forward, it was in chip breaker mode.
Bob
Bob - I completely agree. I haven't yet put the chipbreaker in place properly on one of my japanese planes, but I will try that in the near future on something difficult. I would rather sneak up on the edge with a japanese plane and a tap-in chipbreaker.
I have a kanna that was going to get a dedicated back bevel of about 15 degrees (odate says it's OK, so if the purists don't like that, they can eat it  ), but I may have to rethink that if the chipbreaker works well.
|
CStanford
Member
Registered: 07/28/05
Posts: 823
|
|
I think you nailed this one Todd. The most strident of the anti-chipbreaking crowed seems to have sprung from few planemakers who I think more or less arbitrarily picked a point in history from which to copy planes, and not surprisingly the ones copied had no chipbreakers.
A plane with a chipbreaker requires extra steps to make, materials etc.
They do work.
|
CedarSlayer
Killer of aromatic wood
Registered: 07/06/06
Posts: 2167
Loc: College Station, TX
|
|
Timberwolf said:
Just an observation, but some of the highest rated smoothers do not have "chipbreakers" yet they compete very favorably with the best of them in competition..Knight planes are an example and IIRC, his planes ranked right up there with the best in tests done about five years ago..
As far as chipbreakers go, the early makers knew how to make a buck and no doubt they hyped them up pretty highly..But I believe the main purpose they serve is in damping blade vibration..especially on thin blades, and we know that Stanley in particular, touted the advantages of thin blades in their brochure...
I too can set up a plane without a chipbreaker, that does as well as one that does. I can also make a plane that does not have an adjustable mouth or frog, that does just as well as the plane that has an adjustable mouth. During most tests, the advantage of an adjustable mouth will probably never be seen.
Tests tend to reduce variables so the results are reproducible, clear and understandable. A tool modification that allows tool modification will tend to require much more complex test to display versatility.
If a test were to include multiple grain and wood types, I suspect the single plane winner would either be a low bed angle, high bevel angle, bevel up or a jack with a chip breaker. If user fatigue were included in the test, then I suspect the jack with the chip breaker would win every time. Because this sort of test would require reasonable skill from the users, it would work well as a contest but be difficult to set up well as a purely scientific examination.
A plane that I can flip the blade on, can give me two nice options, but without a chip breaker, I cannot make a single iron plane that is as versatile as a double iron. Ok, I actually did, but it added quite a bit of complexity in other ways. (variable mouth combined with variable bed angle)
In addition to the ability to adjust to wood type, a chip breaker will reduce wear on the back of the blade substantially. Since blade back wear requires more removal of metal to fix, the economy of blade issue makes the chip breaker even more appealing. Historically cutting irons cost more than chip breakers. So for a tool used for your livelihood, a chip breaker may have made good financial sense over the long run.
The Japanese tool market has as strong a set of hype driving it as anywhere in history. Yet they still seem to eventually refine down to the simplest and most reliable form. They do have a lot of single iron planes at the top and bottom end, but the workhorse planes tend to have a nice thick laminated blade, and a chip breaker.
Bob
--------------------
toolmakingart.com
When you have eliminated all unnecessary wood, then whatever remains, however well formed, is too small to serve as originally intended.
|
Timberwolf
Honored Veteran and lant something or other
Registered: 06/05/02
Posts: 44594
Loc: witless protection program
|
|
Well then a question for you, Bob...What is the actual function of a chip breaker..IOW how does it work? If it's just to make the blade "think" it's thicker, why not just make the blade thicker? And if it is the "curve" of the CB at the edge, how would a blade perform if it were made double thick at the edge and bevel the back of the blade just like the front..IOW, be able to flip the blade and get the same angle and performance..
Quote:
In addition to the ability to adjust to wood type, a chip breaker will reduce wear on the back of the blade substantially
How is this possible?? I mean, the way I see it, the wood has already started it's curl upwards and puts no pressure on the back of the blade, except at the junction of the bevel and the back..or what we refer to as "the edge"..
I think the overall performance of a plane does not depend on whether or not it has a chip breaker, but rather on how well the blade is clamped to the frog, the part of the blade that is being pinned to the frog and how far down the blade the levercap or wedge extends down the blade towards the edge...If the cap extends far enough down, it may very well perform in the manner of a chip breaker..
--------------------
"We fight not for honor, nor for wealth, nor for glory, but only and alone,we fight for FREEDOM, which no good man surrenders but with his life"
Robert the Bruce....Scotland 1329
Jack
Semper Fi, Mac
USMC '50/'55
Veterans, Korea
|
AHill
Member
Registered: 01/16/06
Posts: 2914
Loc: Antelope Valley, California
|
|
This has been an interesting and informative thread, which brings to mind an observation and engenders a few more questions.
Observation:
There is almost always more than one solution to a problem. Chip breakers may have solved a problem that was solved differently with bevel up planes or adjustable mouths or scrapers or really, really sharp blades. Just speculation.
Questions:
1. I am guessing that the reason one doesn't see chip breakers or cap irons on specialy planes, moulding planes, etc. is that they weren't typically used on highly figured woods. Any other thoughts?
2. What specific historical evidence is there to enlighten us on how vintage woodworkers dealth with highly figured or tearout prone woods? We know today that a BU plane with a high bevel angle can do the job. A BD plane with a sharp blade, chipbreaker and tight mouth can solve the problem. A BD plane with a HAF can solve the problem. A BD plane with a back bevel can solve the problem. A scraper blade can solve the problem. (I don't count sandpaper as it's a relatively modern invention.)
--------------------
Still Learning,
Allan Hill
|
Peter Tremblay
The Chaplain of WoodNet
Registered: 10/29/07
Posts: 7377
Loc: Forestville, Maryland
|
|
I'll throw in my $0.02 here.
As far as I can tell there are two ways to deal with avoiding tearout on highly figured woods.
The first is a higher cutting angle. Dave (Eoddave) uses a combined angle of 62* on his tiger maple with a LN #62 with no hint of tearout. I use a card scraper most of the time with no tearout. I think (I'm no historian) that the chipbreaker was meant to increase the effective cutting angle of a 45* plane without needing to add a back bevel. I don't think this works because the idea of getting the edge of the chipbreaker close enough to the edge of a slightly cambered blade is a near impossible task. I'm sure this has all been said before but I thought I would add it in again.
Second, and hardly spoken of in comparison, is a very tight mouth. I am going to do some tests but from some limited experience I have a hunch that an effective cutting angle of 37* with a very tight mouth will actually produce no tearout in figured wood.
I think this is the reason that infills have been so capable of tearout free cutting. Their tight mouth, precision fit blade, and their weight that keeps the sole in contact with the wood combines to keep the cut from tearing out ahead of the curl. I think a mouth that is set to an opening of 1.5x or 2x that of the intended thickness of the shaving will yield glassy smooth surfaces, even with low cutting angles. So if you want a .001 cut then the mouth opening should be around .002 or less. I think Ron Brese tries for something under .003 of a mouth opening. I've seen one of his J Planes take a flawless cut on tiger maple with the grain and against the grain.
This can be easily tested with bevel down planes since the mouths are so easily adjusted. Especially, the LV planes can have their mouths micro adjusted with the 'mouth adjustment screw/stop'.
So I'd say chipbreakers are not helpful in stopping tearout, I could be wrong. I'd say that a higher cutting angle or a tighter mouth will yield the results that you/we are interested in.
My $0.02
Peter
--------------------
Do you want a better world?
Then, forgive those who didn't ask for it.
Love those who dislike you.
Show patience and kindness to those that you disagree with.
And allow others to disagree with you.
|
CedarSlayer
Killer of aromatic wood
Registered: 07/06/06
Posts: 2167
Loc: College Station, TX
|
|
Timberwolf said:
Well then a question for you, Bob...What is the actual function of a chip breaker..IOW how does it work? If it's just to make the blade "think" it's thicker, why not just make the blade thicker? And if it is the "curve" of the CB at the edge, how would a blade perform if it were made double thick at the edge and bevel the back of the blade just like the front..IOW, be able to flip the blade and get the same angle and performance..
Quote:
In addition to the ability to adjust to wood type, a chip breaker will reduce wear on the back of the blade substantially
How is this possible?? I mean, the way I see it, the wood has already started it's curl upwards and puts no pressure on the back of the blade, except at the junction of the bevel and the back..or what we refer to as "the edge"..
I think the overall performance of a plane does not depend on whether or not it has a chip breaker, but rather on how well the blade is clamped to the frog, the part of the blade that is being pinned to the frog and how far down the blade the levercap or wedge extends down the blade towards the edge...If the cap extends far enough down, it may very well perform in the manner of a chip breaker..
After a day of flopping into the water and hauling yourself back up onto the board, there is a magical moment when you manage to balance the forces when wind surfing. Suddenly you find yourself on the other side of the lake. This magical moment can also happen on a surfboard, after paddling and catching the ideal wave, suddenly you go from being able to barely see the shore, to stepping off the board onto dry sand.
There is an odd phenomenon in wood turning that I think can be somewhat replicated by a top iron. While wood turning, when you get a blade perfect and the angle perfect an odd magical moment happens, where the blade seems to pull itself into the wood and leave a perfect finish behind. Clean shavings throw themselves over your shoulder, and wonder of wonders, the blade does not wear at all. If all is right, the edge of the blade does not even contact the wood. It starts the cut, but then a smooth finish is made while the blade rives and burnishes the wood. I have a book with photographic evidence of this phenomenon in wood turning.
The actual truth here is that as to why this works, is partial if not complete speculation. However, I find from experience, after moving the top iron right to the edge of the blade, I can use a plane blade that would otherwise not be able to survive the osage I am planing. The top iron not only reinforces the relatively low angle blade, it completely covers the back of the blade, reducing wear to the back of the blade to nothing. instead of a split wedge being pried out of the wood and jamming the mouth of the plane, as this plane normally would when working osage, a type II chip is formed, and the surface left is quite nice. While the plane pushes much easier through nicely grained pine with the chip breaker back a hairs width or more, with the top iron forward this plane can do well, what it could not do at all without the top iron.
When planing ash, I find it easier to have the top iron half a hair back from the cutting edge. Oddly grained cedar seems to do better at this setting, but for cooperatively grained cedar, I like the top iron back at least two hairs width. I don't get out and plane enough to develop or keep a good instinctive feel for adjusting the top iron, but I suspect that if I had the occupational or leisure opportunity to do so, it would not take me long to develop this instinct. Unless the top iron is really matched and tuned to the cutting iron, this skill however, will have no chance of being developed.
My speculation is that woodworkers of the past developed this instinct quickly and saw little point in speculation about it, unless they were having a problem planing or were designing a plane.
Bob
--------------------
toolmakingart.com
When you have eliminated all unnecessary wood, then whatever remains, however well formed, is too small to serve as originally intended.
|
evenfall
Cow Tipper
Registered: 04/19/05
Posts: 5370
Loc: Sacramento Area, CA
|
|
Hi Bob,
LIL here, and thanks for your observations.
I wrote an overview about this sometime ago, it is called Tear out and Wood Machining, By Hand! It helps one get their mind around what is happening to the wood when wood is planed.
Chip breakers allow a common pitched plane that is easy to push, to create a steeper angle, after the shaving is started, so that the "chip" will be caused to break more frequently and prevent tearout from getting started.
Nice when it can work, and it doesn't always.
A plane with the actual bevel of the iron held at a specific angle will always generate a specific chip type that corresponds to that bevel angle, and if you choose correctly, you will avoid tearout that way, directly, where as the Chipbreaker can help you avoid it, indirectly, when it can be made to work, and it can't always be made to wok as reliably as a steeper iron.
When an Iron cannot stop interlocked grain from tearing either, then the angle is still not steep enough. It may mean scraping is the only alternative. There are no chip breakers on scrapers.
Joinery planes didn't use chip breakers because the surfaces made by them were for glue, not for show. Moulding planes didn't use chip breakers because heck, how easy would it be to create a chipbreaker for ever profile, and the wedge on these planes went very near to the edge, while at the same time the mouth of these planes was made really tight.
Tight mouths and thin shavings are a really big part of avoiding tear out. Probably more important thatn the chip breaker. Too, planing in the right directions are as well, likely more important than a chipbreaker.
Another way to avoid tearout, is to select away from lumber that you read to be suspicious of this difficulty. Stick to easy going lumber and you should be able to plane most of it with a Stanley #4. If you do encounter a problem, it will likely be something easy that the chipbreaker if set properly on the Stanley will be able to handle.
In light of chipbreakers, there is grain the common pitched plane will fail to plane even if the chip breaker work, and until LN released the High Angle frog, even a Bedrock was common pitched, and you would have to either resort to a woody pitched higher, perhaps without a chipbreaker to solve the issue.
Two years from now we could still be going on, but who knows what woods are going to be difficult. Common pitch places are the norm. It is a wise investment to have a high angle pitch plane for problems that need solved when they arise, and is one of the reasons why I advocate owning a bevel up plane with a few extra blades. One Plane, many tools in one to solve a number of difficult situations. Chapter 9 of Understanding wood by Bruce Hoadley will help one understand when situations are different and how they need a different approach.
Well anyway. I still am not all that big a fan of chipbreakers, I have fettled and goofed with many, and still concur with Chris's original observations in too many cases. I feel the alternatives to chipbreakers have worked better in my hands.
Strong statement here, but there are plenty of woodworking situations that will overwhelm a common to poor chipbreaker, and some that will be bested even when the chipbreaker is good and set correctly. More often than not when a chipbreaker has met it's match, a plane whose bevel will directly plane the needed chip type from the wood will prevail.
Good Luck! 
--------------------
~Rob
http://www.evenfallstudios.com/woodworks
Woodworking Knowledge, Skill Development, Discussion
"It's psychosomatic. You need a lobotomy. I'll get a saw." 
Calvin & Hobbes
|
JimReed@Tallahassee
Orphaned Plane Doctor
Registered: 09/26/06
Posts: 4195
|
|
evenfall said:
Moulding planes didn't use chip breakers because heck, how easy would it be to create a chipbreaker for ever profile, and the wedge on these planes went very near to the edge, while at the same time the mouth of these planes was made really tight.
When you consider that most moulding planes were made for painted softwood, it makes sense that chipbreakers were not required. Figured wood is rare for mouldings and serious moulding planes for cabinet woods are york pitch.
I can see the difference with my H&R planes. I have a few odd 45 degree H&Rs and they tear out cherry like crazy. My york pitch H&Rs, however, eat cherry and kick out a tortured shaving while leaving a nice finish. The cutting action is almost like scraping.
|
Gary Blum
Member
Registered: 05/02/07
Posts: 44
Loc: Walnut , Iowa
|
|
I have a recent chipbreader experience that I was going to start a new thread about and label it " chipbrekers really work", but this seems like the best place for it.
I had made a set of cabinets and applied hickory edgebanding ( 4mm), and of course all the corner joints weren't perfectly flush, so I grabbed my block plane to flush up the hickory. Well, it worked , but there was definitely some tearout because this banding was sawn off the edge of a board and the grain was up and down constantly and it was just some nasty hickory. I decided to try setting the chpbreaker as close to the blade as I thought possible, maybe 3-4 thousandths away. You could barely see any space between them. Well, I was amazed. It worked really well and totally eliminated any tearout.
That's why I love woodworking and tools so much. There is just so much to learn and even after a long career, a person only knows a tiny fraction of the craft. I have been making planes for a few years now, and that was the first time I ever tried setting a chipbreaker that close. What a revelation.
As to your experiment regarding mouth size, I say experiment away as that is how knowledge is gained and maybe even new knowledge acquired. My own experience has been that of the 3-4 factors influencing tearout, mouth size is the least effective controlling factor. I would rate cut angle number one, ( which a chipbreaker will inflluence), sharpness number two, thickness of cut number 3, and mouth size number 4. I would never use a low cutting angle plane with an extremely tight mouth to trim solid wood edgebanding against plywood. That would possibly tear into that ply and ruin the project. I wo;uld not hesitate to use a plane with a tightly set chipbreaker. If a tight mouth really worked all that well, why would a manufacturer feel the need to offer higher angle blades for their low angle, adjustable mouth planes?
I find it puzzling that so many people argue as to the original intent of the chipbreaker. I have quoted Peter Nicholson from 1812 earlier in this thread, and every other source I have ever seen clearly describes the Primary function of the chipbreaker as breaking chips, which prevents the shaving from gaining the beam strength to lift and tear the wood in front of the cutting edge. Even the name says it : break iron or chipbreaker. Stiffening the iron seems to be side benefit.
I think it is really ironic that the invention which allowed the plane to become so versatile to handle multiple grain and planing situations( and was universally adopted in a very short time ), is now being pooh-poohed in favor of a bevel up variety said to have such amazing versatility to handle any planing situation ..................by rapidly exchanging its' 3 irons!
Kind Regards,
Gary Blum
--------------------
www.blumtoolco.com
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Re: Chip Breakers Work!
[Re: 
Edit
Reply
Quote
