RE: Squaring Rough Lumber

On Jun 16, 8:34=A0am, "Eric" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dougy knows everything about everybody.
>
> ------------------------
>
Oopsies, Eric accidentally top-posted. I guess old habits die hard.

A quick look at the Details makes it clear: Josepi and Eric have the
same street number.

Oh so much for winding sticks, adze and broad axe.

> 1 Concave side down through thickness planer.
> 2 Turn board over and run through thickness planer.

I, too, thought this approach would suffice.
I mean, if you have a planer, why use a joiner?
And, if the board is wide enough, wouldn't a joiner be insufficient
for the task? Mine is about 4"

Frankly, I don't understand how to flatten a six-inch wide board using
a joiner - but I'm no expert (at anything).

-MIKE- wrote:
> On 6/15/11 12:39 AM, CW wrote:
>> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> On 6/14/11 7:50 PM, CW wrote:
>>>> "dpb"<[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>> WW wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks Mike. I only do this on cupped boards. WW
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And unless the board is awfully thick so it doesn't flex at all
>>>>> under the
>>>>> pressure of feed roller you still have a (somewhat) cupped board
>>>>> when done...
>>>>>
>>>> Nope. Flat.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You can take out a cup. I've done that all the time.
>>> You can't take out a bow or twist.
>>>
>> No, YOU probably can't but I do it all the time.
>>
>
> I'm hearing some quote from My Cousin Vinnie about Jack and him magic
> bean stalk means. :-)
>
> Since this group is supposed to be about sharing of ideas and learning
> and all that, I think it would great of you to share the wisdom of
> your technique for this process with us lowly ignorant masses. A
> video would be great.
>
> Otherwise, I'm calling bull$h!t. :-)

I feel that way often. I'm wide open to the fact that people out there have
disproven long held traditional beliefs, and in fact when they do, I'm quite
interested in hearing about it and seeing it. But - if all they post is an
obtuse contradiction, then it's a lot harder to warm to that response.
Hell - I'm a firm believer that there are too many long held beliefs that
only survive on the repetition of them, and that many of them can easily be
proven to be false. Bring it on - it's good for evreryone.

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

WW wrote:

...


>>
> Thanks Mike. I only do this on cupped boards. WW
...


And unless the board is awfully thick so it doesn't flex at all under
the pressure of feed roller you still have a (somewhat) cupped board
when done...

--

Larry Jaques wrote:

> On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 22:39:17 -0700, "CW" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>>"-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
...


>>>You can take out a cup. I've done that all the time.
>>>You can't take out a bow or twist.
>>>
>>>
>>No, YOU probably can't but I do it all the time.
>>
>
> Maybe we're considering bows and warps of 0.500" or more nd you're
> talking about a measly 0.004" or something...
...


Well, one can only remove cupping to the extent either the material is
sufficiently strong to counteract the feed roller down force or is
supported on a wedge/sled; otherwise the material is flattened, goes
under the cutterhead and then returns to the former shape when the
pressure is removed (w/ some reduction in the amount of material in the
high places).

One can only remove bow or twist to the point of having a continuous
plane of reference of the material to the cutterhead which again will
move and rotate as the twist goes under the pressure roller unless the
material is constrained.

It's only simply geometry...

--

I wrote:

> EIGHT STEPS TO SQUARING LUMBER
>
> Courtesy of Cerritos College
>
> Step Process Machine
>
> 1 Rough cut piece to length +1" Radial Arm
> Saw
> 2 Surface one face (Concave side down) Jointer
> 3 Surface to desired thickness Planer
> 4 Joint one edge Jointer
> 5 Rip to desired width + 1/32" Table Saw
> 6 Joint ripped edge
> Jointer
> 7 Square one end Chop
> Saw or Table Saw
> 8 Square other end to desired length Chop Saw or
> Table Saw
>
>
------------------------------------
The above is part of an intro wood working course, WMT-101, I took
last year.

I came away from that course with a true appreciation of the value of
a well tuned
jointer when squaring rough lumber.

Of course it probably didn't hurt that I learned how to properly use a
jointer in that class.

Prior to that my technique was home schooled and my results showed it.

Lew

"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in news:4df82310$0$21172
[email protected]:


> The above is part of an intro wood working course, WMT-101, I took
> last year.
>
> I came away from that course with a true appreciation of the value of
> a well tuned
> jointer when squaring rough lumber.
>
> Of course it probably didn't hurt that I learned how to properly use a
> jointer in that class.
>
> Prior to that my technique was home schooled and my results showed it.
>
> Lew
>
>
>

Could you elaborate a bit on that technique? My technique is pretty much
home schooled as well, and I'd like to try to improve it.

Puckdropper

I wrote:

> I came away from that course with a true appreciation of the value
> of
>> a well tuned
>> jointer when squaring rough lumber.
>>
>> Of course it probably didn't hurt that I learned how to properly
>> use a
>> jointer in that class.
>>
>> Prior to that my technique was home schooled and my results showed
>> it.
--------------------------------
"Puckdropper" wrote:

> Could you elaborate a bit on that technique? My technique is pretty
> much
> home schooled as well, and I'd like to try to improve it.
------------------------------------
Most of it has do with the length of the bed.

Maintaining total support of the stock as it goes thru the cut process
goes a long way toward good performance of the jointer.

If your present machine has short in/out beds, consider adding bed
extensions that can be put in position during use.

I also am a believer in setting the cut depth to 1/32" and forget it.

Adequate push blocks with one having a hook cleat to insure positive
control of the stock as it passes thru the jointer.

Those little plastic paddles covered with foam leave a lot to be
desired IMHO.

Maintaining control of the stock keeps you warm and fuzzy<G>.

Feeding the stock thru the jointer in a smooth continuous motion also
keeps you warm and fuzzy<G>.

HTH

Lew

"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in news:4df83dd6$0$1613
[email protected]:

> --------------------------------
> "Puckdropper" wrote:
>
>> Could you elaborate a bit on that technique? My technique is pretty
>> much
>> home schooled as well, and I'd like to try to improve it.
> ------------------------------------
> Most of it has do with the length of the bed.
>
> Maintaining total support of the stock as it goes thru the cut process
> goes a long way toward good performance of the jointer.
>
> If your present machine has short in/out beds, consider adding bed
> extensions that can be put in position during use.
>
> I also am a believer in setting the cut depth to 1/32" and forget it.
>
> Adequate push blocks with one having a hook cleat to insure positive
> control of the stock as it passes thru the jointer.
>
> Those little plastic paddles covered with foam leave a lot to be
> desired IMHO.
>
> Maintaining control of the stock keeps you warm and fuzzy<G>.
>
> Feeding the stock thru the jointer in a smooth continuous motion also
> keeps you warm and fuzzy<G>.
>
> HTH
>
> Lew
>

Thanks Lew. I've got to agree about those plastic paddles with foam.
They don't seem to provide any pressure towards the bed at all, which
means my board would have a chance to skip or otherwise move.

Puckdropper

Swingman <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> On 6/14/2011 11:07 PM, Puckdropper wrote:
>
>> Could you elaborate a bit on that technique? My technique is pretty
>> much home schooled as well, and I'd like to try to improve it.
>
> In addition to what Lew said, and one of the key points, as I was
> taught in woodshop... the best results can be obtained by keeping the
> majority of any downward pressure necessary to control the stock on
> the _outfeed_ table.
>
>

When jointing a board, the board naturally starts out on the infeed table
and at some point pressure would have to be transitioned to the outfeed
table. Is this just operator preference, or is there a point along the
board where it's best to change from infeed pressure to outfeed pressure?

Puckdropper

I wrote:

>> Adequate push blocks with one having a hook cleat to insure
>> positive
>> control of the stock as it passes thru the jointer.
>>
>> Those little plastic paddles covered with foam leave a lot to be
>> desired IMHO.
>>
>> Maintaining control of the stock keeps you warm and fuzzy<G>.
>>
>> Feeding the stock thru the jointer in a smooth continuous motion
>> also
>> keeps you warm and fuzzy<G>.
-------------------------------
"Puckdropper" wrote:

> Thanks Lew. I've got to agree about those plastic paddles with
> foam.
> They don't seem to provide any pressure towards the bed at all,
> which
> means my board would have a chance to skip or otherwise move.

------------------------------------
I found that a dedicated push paddle helped my results a bunch.

I'll try to describe it.

Start with a 3" W x 15"-18" L x 5/8" (11 ply) piece of die board.

This is the "base".

Cut a 5/8' W x 1/8" DP x 15"-18"dado centered.

Add 4"-5" W x 15"-18" L x 5/8" (11 ply) piece of die board.

This is the "web".

Glue the two boards together forming the letter "T".

Glue a 1/2" x 3/4" x 3" hardwood block, (aft end), across the
underside of the "base" to form a hook which catches the end of the
rough lumber when in use.

This is a workable jointer push block; however, you can show off your
wood working skills by adding an oval cutout for your fingers in the
"web"and tapering the excess "web" material aft of the finger oval.

Round some corners and add a spit coat of 1 lb shellac and you are
good to go.

Have fun.

Lew

BTW, locate the finger oval about 1/3 back from the front of the
ass'y.

"Hoosierpopi" wrote:

> Frankly, I don't understand how to flatten a six-inch wide board
> using
> a joiner - but I'm no expert (at anything).
-------------------------------
I had a 4" bench top jointer which is probably very close to what you
have.

Without building auxiliary infeed and outfeed tables, you are limited
to stock that is less than 4" wide and 36" long.

You can still do a lot of work with that little fellow, but it does
have the above limitations.

If you want to face joint boards wider than 4", either rip into widths
less than 4", or get a wider jointer.

Of course there is always hand work.

Lew

On 06/16/2011 12:15 PM, Robatoy wrote:
> On Jun 16, 3:00 pm, willshak<[email protected]> wrote:
>> Doug Miller wrote the following:
>>
>>> In article<[email protected]>, Stuart<[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>> In article<[email protected]>,
>>>> Doug Miller<[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>>> Lumber: "Timber sawed into boards, planks, or structural members... "
>>
>>>> ^^^^^
>>>> Sawn, surely!
>>
>>> Oddly enough, we use the word "sawn" but primarily as an adjective:
>>> quarter-sawn, rough-sawn, plain-sawn, etc. The past tense of "saw" is usually
>>> "sawed" in American English.
>>
>> It is past participle of the word 'saw', just like the past participle
>> of the word 'blow' is 'blown'.
>> Blow the house down.
>> The wind blew the house down.
>> The house was blown down, not blowed down.
>>
> Different word.
> Mouse mice, House houses.
>
I saw you saw that lumber.
You were seen you sawing that lumber.

I'm getting a headache...

On 06/16/2011 12:42 PM, Doug Miller wrote:
> In article<[email protected]>, willshak<[email protected]> wrote:
>> Doug Miller wrote the following:
>>> In article<[email protected]>, Stuart<[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article<[email protected]>,
>>>> Doug Miller<[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Lumber: "Timber sawed into boards, planks, or structural members... "
>>>>>
>>>> ^^^^^
>>>> Sawn, surely!
>>>>
>>>
>>> Oddly enough, we use the word "sawn" but primarily as an adjective:
>>> quarter-sawn, rough-sawn, plain-sawn, etc. The past tense of "saw" is usually
>>> "sawed" in American English.
>>>
>>
>> It is past participle of the word 'saw', just like the past participle
>> of the word 'blow' is 'blown'.
>> Blow the house down.
>> The wind blew the house down.
>> The house was blown down, not blowed down.
>
> OK, then, if "saw" follows the same rules as "blow":
> - Saw the tree down.
> - The logger sew the tree down.
> Oops. I don't think that works.
>
> There's nothing wrong with saying "The tree was sawed down, and then the log
> was sawed into boards."

Wouldn't that be sawed down and then sawed up?

On 6/16/2011 1:30 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> In article<[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>>
>> On 6/16/11 2:15 PM, Robatoy wrote:
>>> On Jun 16, 3:00 pm, willshak<[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Doug Miller wrote the following:
>>>>
>>>>> In article<[email protected]>, Stuart<[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> In article<[email protected]>,
>>>>>> Doug Miller<[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> Lumber: "Timber sawed into boards, planks, or structural members... "
>>>>
>>>>>> ^^^^^
>>>>>> Sawn, surely!
>>>>
>>>>> Oddly enough, we use the word "sawn" but primarily as an adjective:
>>>>> quarter-sawn, rough-sawn, plain-sawn, etc. The past tense of "saw" is usually
>>>>> "sawed" in American English.
>>>>

>
>
Oh for heaven's sake - just cut the damn stuff! :-)

"Morgans" wrote:

> The biggest problem I see is people pushing down on the lumber on
> the infeed side. Once there is a few inches on the outfeed table,
> put all the pressure on the outfeed.
-------------------------------------
The dedicated jointer paddle complete with hook cleat on it's aft end
addresses this issue directly.

Lew

In article <[email protected]>,
J. Clarke <[email protected]> wrote:
> Are you in the UK where a "planer" is the device that in the US is known
> as a "jointer" and the "thicknesser" is the device that in the US is
> known as a "planer"?

Now I'm even more confused.

I have here a planer/thicknesser. The top is an Aluminium bed with a slot
running across it at right angles, through which blades protrude which
rotate at high speed. I pass timber along the bed and the blades remove
wood, flatening the timber - hopefully! That's a planer.

Beneath the bed there is an aperture running through the body of the machine,
having a platform which can be raised up towards the underside of the bed
and hence the rotating blades. The platforn height controls the amount of
wood removed from the top side of any timber passed through it and hence its
resulting thickness. That's a thicknesser.

However, mostly I just reach for my Stanley No7.

--
Stuart Winsor

Midland RISC OS show - Sat July 9th 2011

http://mug.riscos.org/show11/MUGshow.html

In article <[email protected]>,
Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
> >I have here a planer/thicknesser. The top is an Aluminium bed with a
> >slot running across it at right angles, through which blades protrude
> >which rotate at high speed. I pass timber along the bed and the blades
> >remove wood, flatening the timber - hopefully! That's a planer.

> In the USA, we call that a jointer.

Reading this group for quite a while now, I had always assumed the term
referred to some some sort of machine for cutting various joints in
wood. That's what the name suggests.

> And the wood that we use for cabinetmaking, we call "lumber". "Timber",
> here, means standing trees which will eventually become lumber.
> "Timber" is also used, less frequently, to refer to very large wooden
> beams.

Timber:
"(n) wood suitable for building or carpentry whether growing or
cut, a beam or large piece of wood in a framework, as of a house, ship &c"

Lumber:
"(n) Furniture stored away out of use: anything cumbersome or
useless"

Yes, I have become accustomed to the (mis-)use of these words round here.

> >Beneath the bed there is an aperture running through the body of the
> >machine, having a platform which can be raised up towards the underside
> >of the bed and hence the rotating blades. The platform height controls
> >the amount of wood removed from the top side of any timber passed
> >through it and hence its resulting thickness. That's a thicknesser.

> In the USA, we call that a planer.

You really are a strange lot.

> >However, mostly I just reach for my Stanley No7.

> We call that a plane -- as I imagine you do too.

Actually, with its length of 22" it's known as

<g>

a jointer!

Yes it's a plane.

--
Stuart Winsor

Midland RISC OS show - Sat July 9th 2011

http://mug.riscos.org/show11/MUGshow.html

In article <[email protected]>,
Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
> We often think that about you too. :-) What was it Churchill called us,
> two countries divided by a common language?

Yes, I was thinking along those lines too. :-)

--
Stuart Winsor

Midland RISC OS show - Sat July 9th 2011

http://mug.riscos.org/show11/MUGshow.html

In article <[email protected]>,
Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
> Lumber: "Timber sawed into boards, planks, or structural members... "
^^^^^
Sawn, surely!

--
Stuart Winsor

Midland RISC OS show - Sat July 9th 2011

http://mug.riscos.org/show11/MUGshow.html

On Jun 16, 9:09=A0am, Stuart <[email protected]> wrote:


>> Lumber: "Timber sawed into boards, planks, or structural members... "
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ^^^^^
> Sawn, surely!
>

Surely.

Quarter sawn lumber. Sawed off shotgun.

"Puckdropper" wrote

Could you elaborate a bit on that technique? My technique is pretty much
home schooled as well, and I'd like to try to improve it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

The biggest problem I see is people pushing down on the lumber on the infeed
side. Once there is a few inches on the outfeed table, put all the pressure
on the outfeed.

-- Jim in NC

On 6/14/2011 7:48 PM, CW wrote:
> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message

>> AFAIK, the reason you don't start on the planer is because it does
>> nothing to correct any bow or twist along the board's length.
>
>
> Yes it does.

Correct ... but only on those high parts of the board that the knives
hit does it effectively reduce the relative overall cup, bow or twist of
the stock.

BUT, that doesn't necessarily have the desired effect of dimensioning a
board to even thickness throughout its length.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 6/14/11 11:37 AM, WW wrote:
>>
>> 1 Concave side down through thickness planer.
>> 2 Turn board over and run through thickness planer.
>> 3 Run lengthwise on table saw.
>> 4 Flip board and run lengthwise on other edge.
>> 5 Square ends on chop saw.
>>
>> Am I missing something here? WW
>>
>
> AFAIK, the reason you don't start on the planer is because it does
> nothing to correct any bow or twist along the board's length.


Yes it does.

Doug Miller wrote the following:
> In article <[email protected]>, Stuart <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Lumber: "Timber sawed into boards, planks, or structural members... "
>>>
>> ^^^^^
>> Sawn, surely!
>>
>
> Oddly enough, we use the word "sawn" but primarily as an adjective:
> quarter-sawn, rough-sawn, plain-sawn, etc. The past tense of "saw" is usually
> "sawed" in American English.
>

It is past participle of the word 'saw', just like the past participle
of the word 'blow' is 'blown'.
Blow the house down.
The wind blew the house down.
The house was blown down, not blowed down.



--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
In the original Orange County. Est. 1683
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

On 6/14/2011 7:00 AM, Leon wrote:
> On 6/14/2011 12:45 AM, Lew Hodgett wrote:

>> ----------------------------------
>> EIGHT STEPS TO SQUARING LUMBER
>>
>> Courtesy of Cerritos College
>>
>> Step Process
>> Machine
>>
>> 1 Rough cut piece to length +1" Radial Arm Saw
>> 2 Surface one face (Concave side down) Jointer
>> 3 Surface to desired thickness Planer
>> 4 Joint one edge
>> Jointer
>> 5 Rip to desired width + 1/32" Table Saw
>> 6 Joint ripped edge Jointer
>> 7 Square one end Chop Saw
>> or Table Saw
>> 8 Square other end to desired length Chop Saw or
>> Table Saw
>
> I recall many years ago, many many years ago ;~) one would get into a
> heap of trouble in shop class if you returned to the jointer to try to
> establish the board width with the jointer. Board edges could become
> nonparallel without a fixed indexing surface like the a rip fence.

I agree that step 6 should be unnecessary with a sharp table saw blade
set at 90 degrees, although a single pass with a well setup jointer AND
proper technique, shouldn't hurt anything ... AAMOF, I occasionally do
it when prepping boards for flat panel glue-ups.

The fly in the ointment is that a well setup jointer and proper
technique are not givens in the age of GoogleXpertise, versus learning
from an experienced teacher in a shop environment.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"dpb" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> WW wrote:
>
> ...
>
>
>>>
>> Thanks Mike. I only do this on cupped boards. WW
> ...
>
>
> And unless the board is awfully thick so it doesn't flex at all under the
> pressure of feed roller you still have a (somewhat) cupped board when
> done...
>
Nope. Flat.

On 6/15/2011 10:58 AM, Puckdropper wrote:
> Swingman<[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>> On 6/14/2011 11:07 PM, Puckdropper wrote:
>>
>>> Could you elaborate a bit on that technique? My technique is pretty
>>> much home schooled as well, and I'd like to try to improve it.
>>
>> In addition to what Lew said, and one of the key points, as I was
>> taught in woodshop... the best results can be obtained by keeping the
>> majority of any downward pressure necessary to control the stock on
>> the _outfeed_ table.
>>
>>
>
> When jointing a board, the board naturally starts out on the infeed table
> and at some point pressure would have to be transitioned to the outfeed
> table. Is this just operator preference, or is there a point along the
> board where it's best to change from infeed pressure to outfeed pressure?
>
> Puckdropper

I would change pressure to the out feed as soon as I could. Basically
as soon as the out feed can support the board.

On 6/15/2011 1:13 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
> On 6/15/11 12:07 PM, CW wrote:
>> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> On 6/15/11 12:37 AM, CW wrote:
>>>> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>
>>> I believe we may just have a misunderstanding concerning terminology.
>>> A planer will correct cupping, just fine.
>>
>> Nope.
>>
>>>
>>> It won't correct bow or twist on any board longer than, probably 2 feet.
>>
>> Yes it will.
>>
>>> It's just not possible on a normal planer that most woodworkers have in
>>> their shops.
>>
>> Yes it is.
>>
>>
>>> "Having been a professional machinist and tool maker for the past 25
>>> years," perhaps you've been using a planer with some super long bed and
>>> two sets of rollers or something.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Delta 22-560
>>
>
> Put up or shut, then. Let's see some video.
>
>
You can use a sled that will support the warped/twisted/cupped board.
The planer will flatten that board.

"-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Since this group is supposed to be about sharing of ideas and learning
> and all that, I think it would great of you to share the wisdom of your
> technique for this process with us lowly ignorant masses. A video would
> be great.


An explanation wouldn't it. You would have to see it. The last movie camera
I had was a super 8 and will probably be the last one I ever own. No use for
it.

>
> Otherwise, I'm calling bull$h!t. :-)
>
>

Fine with me. Your opinion means less to me than the electrons it takes to
send this message.

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
> "-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > On 6/14/11 11:37 AM, WW wrote:
> >>
> >> 1 Concave side down through thickness planer.
> >> 2 Turn board over and run through thickness planer.
> >> 3 Run lengthwise on table saw.
> >> 4 Flip board and run lengthwise on other edge.
> >> 5 Square ends on chop saw.
> >>
> >> Am I missing something here? WW
> >>
> >
> > AFAIK, the reason you don't start on the planer is because it does
> > nothing to correct any bow or twist along the board's length.
>
>
> Yes it does.

Are you in the UK where a "planer" is the device that in the US is known
as a "jointer" and the "thicknesser" is the device that in the US is
known as a "planer"?

Because a US "planer" does little to correct bow or twist unless you
construct a special sled to support the board in the bowed or twisted
state.

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
> "-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > On 6/14/11 7:48 PM, CW wrote:
> >> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:[email protected]...
> >>> On 6/14/11 11:37 AM, WW wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> 1 Concave side down through thickness planer.
> >>>> 2 Turn board over and run through thickness planer.
> >>>> 3 Run lengthwise on table saw.
> >>>> 4 Flip board and run lengthwise on other edge.
> >>>> 5 Square ends on chop saw.
> >>>>
> >>>> Am I missing something here? WW
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> AFAIK, the reason you don't start on the planer is because it does
> >>> nothing to correct any bow or twist along the board's length.
> >>
> >>
> >> Yes it does.
> >>
> >
> > The only way it would is if you were using some sort of a sled.
> > Short of that, you may thinks it's correcting a bow or twist, but it's
> > not.
> >
> >
> > --
> As I said in a previous post, there was going to be someone out there that
> tells me what I have been doing for years doesn't work. Having been a
> professional machinist and tool maker for the past 25 years, have the
> concept of flat, paralel and square are pretty well down. Yes, it works. If
> it doesn't work for you, you aren't doing it right.

OK, tell us how to take twist out of a board using a planer without a
sled.

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
> "-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > On 6/15/11 12:37 AM, CW wrote:
> >> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>
> >
> > I believe we may just have a misunderstanding concerning terminology.
> > A planer will correct cupping, just fine.
>
> Nope.
>
> >
> > It won't correct bow or twist on any board longer than, probably 2 feet.
>
> Yes it will.
>
> > It's just not possible on a normal planer that most woodworkers have in
> > their shops.
>
> Yes it is.
>
>
> > "Having been a professional machinist and tool maker for the past 25
> > years," perhaps you've been using a planer with some super long bed and
> > two sets of rollers or something.
> >
>
>
> Delta 22-560

I have one of those and it has corrected cupping just fine on many
occasions but it has never done a damned thing for bow or twist.

Sorry, but you're either mistaken or lying.

In article <[email protected]>, lcb11211
@swbelldotnet says...
>
> On 6/15/2011 1:13 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
> > On 6/15/11 12:07 PM, CW wrote:
> >> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:[email protected]...
> >>> On 6/15/11 12:37 AM, CW wrote:
> >>>> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I believe we may just have a misunderstanding concerning terminology.
> >>> A planer will correct cupping, just fine.
> >>
> >> Nope.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> It won't correct bow or twist on any board longer than, probably 2 feet.
> >>
> >> Yes it will.
> >>
> >>> It's just not possible on a normal planer that most woodworkers have in
> >>> their shops.
> >>
> >> Yes it is.
> >>
> >>
> >>> "Having been a professional machinist and tool maker for the past 25
> >>> years," perhaps you've been using a planer with some super long bed and
> >>> two sets of rollers or something.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> Delta 22-560
> >>
> >
> > Put up or shut, then. Let's see some video.
> >
> >
> You can use a sled that will support the warped/twisted/cupped board.
> The planer will flatten that board.

Yes, you can. I want to see his.

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
> "-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > On 6/15/11 12:07 PM, CW wrote:
> >> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:[email protected]...
> >>> On 6/15/11 12:37 AM, CW wrote:
> >>>> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I believe we may just have a misunderstanding concerning terminology.
> >>> A planer will correct cupping, just fine.
> >>
> >> Nope.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> It won't correct bow or twist on any board longer than, probably 2 feet.
> >>
> >> Yes it will.
> >>
> >>> It's just not possible on a normal planer that most woodworkers have in
> >>> their shops.
> >>
> >> Yes it is.
> >>
> >>
> >>> "Having been a professional machinist and tool maker for the past 25
> >>> years," perhaps you've been using a planer with some super long bed and
> >>> two sets of rollers or something.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> Delta 22-560
> >>
> >
> > Put up or shut, then. Let's see some video.
> >
> >
> You going to buy me the camera?

What, you don't know a kid with a cell phone?

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>
> On 6/16/11 2:15 PM, Robatoy wrote:
> > On Jun 16, 3:00 pm, willshak<[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Doug Miller wrote the following:
> >>
> >>> In article<[email protected]>, Stuart<[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>>> In article<[email protected]>,
> >>>> Doug Miller<[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>>>> Lumber: "Timber sawed into boards, planks, or structural members... "
> >>
> >>>> ^^^^^
> >>>> Sawn, surely!
> >>
> >>> Oddly enough, we use the word "sawn" but primarily as an adjective:
> >>> quarter-sawn, rough-sawn, plain-sawn, etc. The past tense of "saw" is usually
> >>> "sawed" in American English.
> >>
> >> It is past participle of the word 'saw', just like the past participle
> >> of the word 'blow' is 'blown'.
> >> Blow the house down.
> >> The wind blew the house down.
> >> The house was blown down, not blowed down.
> >>
> > Different word.
> > Mouse mice, House houses.
> >
>
> Get it right, man.... sheesh.....
> Moose, moosen or meese

I thought "meeses" was the plural of mouse. At least that's what Hannah
Barbera would have led one to believe.

> box, boxen
>
> Whatever you call it, it's fun to get blowed.

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
> Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote:
> : On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 06:22:35 -0700, Robatoy wrote:
>
> :>> Sawn, surely!
> :>>
> :>>
> :> Surely.
> :>
> :> Quarter sawn lumber. Sawed off shotgun.
>
> : Ah, but you're forgetting the "regularization" of verbs promoted by the
> : publishing industry :-). I still wince when I hear things like "pleaded"
> : instead of "pled" and the like.
>
> Me too. Blech.

Used to be that you knew you had a nerd on your hands when he referred
to a multipolicity of the commonplace pointing device as "mouses" but
referred to a group of small rodents as "mice". Dunno if that's still
true.

I find it interesting that no one mentioned hand jointing after.
If I am joining up a panel, I will hand joint after ripping, so that the
middle is sprung a little. That way the ends when they shrink won't gap.
So joint after yes... but hand joint to be sure.



On 6/14/2011 8:46 AM, Leon wrote:
> On 6/14/2011 7:29 AM, Swingman wrote:
>> On 6/14/2011 7:00 AM, Leon wrote:
>>> On 6/14/2011 12:45 AM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
>>
>>>> ----------------------------------
>>>> EIGHT STEPS TO SQUARING LUMBER
>>>>
>>>> Courtesy of Cerritos College
>>>>
>>>> Step Process
>>>> Machine
>>>>
>>>> 1 Rough cut piece to length +1" Radial Arm Saw
>>>> 2 Surface one face (Concave side down) Jointer
>>>> 3 Surface to desired thickness Planer
>>>> 4 Joint one edge
>>>> Jointer
>>>> 5 Rip to desired width + 1/32" Table Saw
>>>> 6 Joint ripped edge Jointer
>>>> 7 Square one end Chop Saw
>>>> or Table Saw
>>>> 8 Square other end to desired length Chop Saw or
>>>> Table Saw
>>>
>>> I recall many years ago, many many years ago ;~) one would get into a
>>> heap of trouble in shop class if you returned to the jointer to try to
>>> establish the board width with the jointer. Board edges could become
>>> nonparallel without a fixed indexing surface like the a rip fence.
>>
>> I agree that step 6 should be unnecessary with a sharp table saw blade
>> set at 90 degrees, although a single pass with a well setup jointer AND
>> proper technique, shouldn't hurt anything ... AAMOF, I occasionally do
>> it when prepping boards for flat panel glue-ups.
>>
>> The fly in the ointment is that a well setup jointer and proper
>> technique are not givens in the age of GoogleXpertise, versus learning
>> from an experienced teacher in a shop environment.
>>
>
> Agreed! I use'ta occasionally make a trip back to the jointer too. ;~)
> What ever works or straightens out a problem, no pun intended.
>
> I was at odds with the fact that a college published the technically
> improper steps. Not surprised mind you.
>
>
>

"-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 6/14/11 11:37 AM, WW wrote:
>>
>> 1 Concave side down through thickness planer.
>> 2 Turn board over and run through thickness planer.
>> 3 Run lengthwise on table saw.
>> 4 Flip board and run lengthwise on other edge.
>> 5 Square ends on chop saw.
>>
>> Am I missing something here? WW
>>
>
> AFAIK, the reason you don't start on the planer is because it does
> nothing to correct any bow or twist along the board's length.
> The jointer doesn't just remove cupping, it removes the bow and twist
> from the length of a board. Once you've produced one wide edge that is
> perfectly flat, that is the reference edge for the planer.
>
>
> --
>
> -MIKE-
>
> "Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
> --Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
> --
> http://mikedrums.com
> [email protected]
> ---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
>
Thanks Mike. I only do this on cupped boards. WW

"-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 6/14/11 7:50 PM, CW wrote:
>> "dpb"<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>>> WW wrote:
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Thanks Mike. I only do this on cupped boards. WW
>>> ...
>>>
>>>
>>> And unless the board is awfully thick so it doesn't flex at all under
>>> the
>>> pressure of feed roller you still have a (somewhat) cupped board when
>>> done...
>>>
>> Nope. Flat.
>>
>
> You can take out a cup. I've done that all the time.
> You can't take out a bow or twist.
>
No, YOU probably can't but I do it all the time.

"-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 6/14/11 7:48 PM, CW wrote:
>> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> On 6/14/11 11:37 AM, WW wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 1 Concave side down through thickness planer.
>>>> 2 Turn board over and run through thickness planer.
>>>> 3 Run lengthwise on table saw.
>>>> 4 Flip board and run lengthwise on other edge.
>>>> 5 Square ends on chop saw.
>>>>
>>>> Am I missing something here? WW
>>>>
>>>
>>> AFAIK, the reason you don't start on the planer is because it does
>>> nothing to correct any bow or twist along the board's length.
>>
>>
>> Yes it does.
>>
>
> The only way it would is if you were using some sort of a sled.
> Short of that, you may thinks it's correcting a bow or twist, but it's
> not.
>
>
> --
As I said in a previous post, there was going to be someone out there that
tells me what I have been doing for years doesn't work. Having been a
professional machinist and tool maker for the past 25 years, have the
concept of flat, paralel and square are pretty well down. Yes, it works. If
it doesn't work for you, you aren't doing it right.

On 6/14/2011 11:37 AM, WW wrote:
> "Lew Hodgett"<[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> This may be of interest to some of you.
>>
>> Lew
>> ----------------------------------
>> EIGHT STEPS TO SQUARING LUMBER
>>
>> Courtesy of Cerritos College
>>
>> Step Process Machine
>>
>> 1 Rough cut piece to length +1" Radial Arm Saw
>> 2 Surface one face (Concave side down) Jointer
>> 3 Surface to desired thickness Planer
>> 4 Joint one edge Jointer
>> 5 Rip to desired width + 1/32" Table Saw
>> 6 Joint ripped edge Jointer
>> 7 Square one end Chop Saw or
>> Table Saw
>> 8 Square other end to desired length Chop Saw or Table
>> Saw
>>
>
>> Lew I am a wood butcher so here is my method with what tools I have.
>
> 1 Concave side down through thickness planer.
> 2 Turn board over and run through thickness planer.
> 3 Run lengthwise on table saw.
> 4 Flip board and run lengthwise on other edge.
> 5 Square ends on chop saw.
>
> Am I missing something here? WW


Missing a lot. If the board has a twist from one end to the other the
planer will deliver you a board that is thinner with the same twist.

Same sorta goes for the first cut on the TS.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 08:58:01 -0700 (PDT), beecrofter
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Oh so much for winding sticks, adze and broad axe.

Hey, hey, hey!
You can't call 'em "broads" any more.
Watch it.

--
Happiness is when what you think, what
you say, and what you do are in harmony.
-- Mahatma Gandhi

On Jun 16, 3:00=A0pm, willshak <[email protected]> wrote:
> Doug Miller wrote the following:
>
> > In article <[email protected]>, Stuart <[email protected]=
o.uk> wrote:
>
> >> In article <[email protected]>,
> >> =A0 Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>> Lumber: "Timber sawed into boards, planks, or structural members... "
>
> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0^^^^^
> >> Sawn, surely!
>
> > Oddly enough, we use the word "sawn" but primarily as an adjective:
> > quarter-sawn, rough-sawn, plain-sawn, etc. The past tense of "saw" is u=
sually
> > "sawed" in American English.
>
> It is past participle of the word 'saw', just like the past participle
> of the word 'blow' is 'blown'.
> Blow the house down.
> The wind blew the house down.
> The house was blown down, not blowed down.
>
Different word.
Mouse mice, House houses.

On Jun 14, 1:45=A0am, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> This may be of interest to some of you.
>
> Lew
> ----------------------------------
> EIGHT STEPS TO SQUARING LUMBER
>
> Courtesy of Cerritos College
>
> Step Process
> Machine
>
> 1 =A0 =A0 =A0 Rough cut piece to length +1" =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 Radial Arm Saw
> 2 =A0 =A0 =A0 Surface one face (Concave side down) =A0 =A0 Jointer
> 3 =A0 =A0 =A0 Surface to desired thickness =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 =A0 Planer
> 4 =A0 =A0 =A0 Joint one edge
> Jointer
> 5 =A0 =A0 =A0 Rip to desired width + 1/32" =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 =A0 Table Saw
> 6 =A0 =A0 =A0 Joint ripped edge =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Jointer
> 7 =A0 =A0 =A0 Square one end =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Chop Saw
> or Table Saw
> 8 =A0 =A0 =A0 Square other end to desired length =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0C=
hop Saw or
> Table Saw

Plane one side flat with a #5, 6, 7, or 8 jack, fore, or jointer,
cupped or bowed side down, shims underneath to support
the board if necessary. Check for twist with a pair of winding
sticks. Use a scratch gauge to establish the opposite side,
then plane until the iron just splits the scratch lines.

For the edges, plane one edge straight, though not necessarily
square to the adjacent faces. You only need a straight corner
to run against the table saw fence. Rip the opposite side an
eighth or so over, then turn the board and rip the planed, though
not necessarily square edge true.

If the iron was sharp, you're done. The guy with the power
jointer and planer now gets to sand, using 80 or 100 grit
to remove the washboard marks and succeeding grits up
to 220 to remove the scratch marks from the coarser
grits.

On 6/14/2011 7:29 AM, Swingman wrote:
> On 6/14/2011 7:00 AM, Leon wrote:
>> On 6/14/2011 12:45 AM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
>
>>> ----------------------------------
>>> EIGHT STEPS TO SQUARING LUMBER
>>>
>>> Courtesy of Cerritos College
>>>
>>> Step Process
>>> Machine
>>>
>>> 1 Rough cut piece to length +1" Radial Arm Saw
>>> 2 Surface one face (Concave side down) Jointer
>>> 3 Surface to desired thickness Planer
>>> 4 Joint one edge
>>> Jointer
>>> 5 Rip to desired width + 1/32" Table Saw
>>> 6 Joint ripped edge Jointer
>>> 7 Square one end Chop Saw
>>> or Table Saw
>>> 8 Square other end to desired length Chop Saw or
>>> Table Saw
>>
>> I recall many years ago, many many years ago ;~) one would get into a
>> heap of trouble in shop class if you returned to the jointer to try to
>> establish the board width with the jointer. Board edges could become
>> nonparallel without a fixed indexing surface like the a rip fence.
>
> I agree that step 6 should be unnecessary with a sharp table saw blade
> set at 90 degrees, although a single pass with a well setup jointer AND
> proper technique, shouldn't hurt anything ... AAMOF, I occasionally do
> it when prepping boards for flat panel glue-ups.
>
> The fly in the ointment is that a well setup jointer and proper
> technique are not givens in the age of GoogleXpertise, versus learning
> from an experienced teacher in a shop environment.
>

Agreed! I use'ta occasionally make a trip back to the jointer too. ;~)
What ever works or straightens out a problem, no pun intended.

I was at odds with the fact that a college published the technically
improper steps. Not surprised mind you.

willshak wrote:

>
> It is past participle of the word 'saw', just like the past participle
> of the word 'blow' is 'blown'.
> Blow the house down.
> The wind blew the house down.
> The house was blown down, not blowed down.

Unless you're from south of the Mason Dixon Line...

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

On Jun 16, 3:55=A0pm, -MIKE- <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 6/16/11 2:15 PM, Robatoy wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 16, 3:00 pm, willshak<[email protected]> =A0wrote:
> >> Doug Miller wrote the following:
>
> >>> In article<[email protected]>, Stuart<[email protected]=
o.uk> =A0wrote:
>
> >>>> In article<[email protected]>,
> >>>> =A0 =A0Doug Miller<[email protected]> =A0wrote:
>
> >>>>> Lumber: "Timber sawed into boards, planks, or structural members...=
"
>
> >>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ^^^^^
> >>>> Sawn, surely!
>
> >>> Oddly enough, we use the word "sawn" but primarily as an adjective:
> >>> quarter-sawn, rough-sawn, plain-sawn, etc. The past tense of "saw" is=
usually
> >>> "sawed" in American English.
>
> >> It is past participle of the word 'saw', just like the past participle
> >> of the word 'blow' is 'blown'.
> >> Blow the house down.
> >> The wind blew the house down.
> >> The house was blown down, not blowed down.
>
> > Different word.
> > Mouse mice, House houses.
>
> Get it right, man.... sheesh.....
> Moose, moosen or meese
> box, boxen
>
> Whatever you call it, it's fun to get blowed.
>
I know of Three little pigs who would disagree with that.... well two
of them anyway..

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 17:48:10 -0700, "CW" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>"-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On 6/14/11 11:37 AM, WW wrote:
>>>
>>> 1 Concave side down through thickness planer.
>>> 2 Turn board over and run through thickness planer.
>>> 3 Run lengthwise on table saw.
>>> 4 Flip board and run lengthwise on other edge.
>>> 5 Square ends on chop saw.
>>>
>>> Am I missing something here? WW

You'd be missing about 7/8 of the thickness of the board by then, I'd
guess.


>> AFAIK, the reason you don't start on the planer is because it does
>> nothing to correct any bow or twist along the board's length.
>
>Yes it does.

Maybe a skosh, but not a whole lotta. One would have to secure the
board in its twisted lovliness to a stiff substrate and then run it
through the planer to take twist out. If it were square, do it 4 times
to get a more decent facsimile of a straight board. IOW, it wouldn't
be easy, CW.

What's your method?

--
"The history of temperature change over time is related to
the shape of the continents, the shape of the sea floor,
the pulling apart of the crust, the stitching back together
of the crust, the opening and closing of sea ways, changes
in the Earth's orbit, changes in solar energy, supernoval
eruptions, comet dust, impacts by comets and asteroids,
volcanic activity, bacteria, soil formation, sedimentation,
ocean currents, and the chemistry of air. If we humans, in
a fit of ego, think we can change these normal planetary
processes, then we need stronger medication."
--Ian Plimer
_Heaven and Earth: Global Warming, the Missing Science_

On Jun 16, 1:19=A0pm, FrozenNorth <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On 6/16/11 12:49 PM, Doug Miller wrote:> In article<51e4419d25Spam...@arg=
onet.co.uk>, Stuart<[email protected]> =A0wrote:
> >> In article<[email protected]>,
> >> =A0 =A0Doug Miller<[email protected]> =A0wrote:
> >>> Lumber: "Timber sawed into boards, planks, or structural members... "
> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ^^^^^
> >> Sawn, surely!
>
> > Oddly enough, we use the word "sawn" but primarily as an adjective:
> > quarter-sawn, rough-sawn, plain-sawn, etc. The past tense of "saw" is u=
sually
> > "sawed" in American English.
>
> I sawed that coming :-)
>
> --
> Froz...
>
> The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.

American English. Is that anything like German Spanish?

"-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> You'd think a reasonable person would say,
> "You can do it with shims or sled... that's how I do it."
>
>
I would if I did but I don't so I won't.

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

This may be of interest to some of you.

Lew
----------------------------------
EIGHT STEPS TO SQUARING LUMBER

Courtesy of Cerritos College

Step Process
Machine

1 Rough cut piece to length +1" Radial Arm Saw
2 Surface one face (Concave side down) Jointer
3 Surface to desired thickness Planer
4 Joint one edge
Jointer
5 Rip to desired width + 1/32" Table Saw
6 Joint ripped edge Jointer
7 Square one end Chop Saw
or Table Saw
8 Square other end to desired length Chop Saw or
Table Saw


==========
Thanks for that, being new to jointing and just purchased one still in the
box.

Doesn't the concave surface present problems to "fix" the first side?

Is there a technique to not making a rocking horse?


--

Eric

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

This may be of interest to some of you.

Lew
----------------------------------
EIGHT STEPS TO SQUARING LUMBER

Courtesy of Cerritos College

Step Process
Machine

1 Rough cut piece to length +1" Radial Arm Saw
2 Surface one face (Concave side down) Jointer
3 Surface to desired thickness Planer
4 Joint one edge
Jointer
5 Rip to desired width + 1/32" Table Saw
6 Joint ripped edge Jointer
7 Square one end Chop Saw
or Table Saw
8 Square other end to desired length Chop Saw or
Table Saw


==========
Thanks for that, being new to jointing and just purchased one still in the
box.

Doesn't the concave surface present problems to "fix" the first side?

Is there a technique to not making a rocking horse?


--

Eric

On 6/14/11 11:37 AM, WW wrote:
>
> 1 Concave side down through thickness planer.
> 2 Turn board over and run through thickness planer.
> 3 Run lengthwise on table saw.
> 4 Flip board and run lengthwise on other edge.
> 5 Square ends on chop saw.
>
> Am I missing something here? WW
>

AFAIK, the reason you don't start on the planer is because it does
nothing to correct any bow or twist along the board's length.
The jointer doesn't just remove cupping, it removes the bow and twist
from the length of a board. Once you've produced one wide edge that is
perfectly flat, that is the reference edge for the planer.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

"WW" wrote in message news:[email protected]...


"-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 6/14/11 11:37 AM, WW wrote:
>>
>> 1 Concave side down through thickness planer.
>> 2 Turn board over and run through thickness planer.
>> 3 Run lengthwise on table saw.
>> 4 Flip board and run lengthwise on other edge.
>> 5 Square ends on chop saw.
>>
>> Am I missing something here? WW
>>
>
> AFAIK, the reason you don't start on the planer is because it does
> nothing to correct any bow or twist along the board's length.
> The jointer doesn't just remove cupping, it removes the bow and twist
> from the length of a board. Once you've produced one wide edge that is
> perfectly flat, that is the reference edge for the planer.
>
>
> --
>
> -MIKE-
>
> "Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
> --Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
> --
> http://mikedrums.com
> [email protected]
> ---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
>
Thanks Mike. I only do this on cupped boards. WW

=======

Key word there is "Thickness" planer


--

Eric

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
> "-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > On 6/14/11 11:37 AM, WW wrote:
> >>
> >> 1 Concave side down through thickness planer.
> >> 2 Turn board over and run through thickness planer.
> >> 3 Run lengthwise on table saw.
> >> 4 Flip board and run lengthwise on other edge.
> >> 5 Square ends on chop saw.
> >>
> >> Am I missing something here? WW
> >>
> >
> > AFAIK, the reason you don't start on the planer is because it does
> > nothing to correct any bow or twist along the board's length.
>
>
> Yes it does.

Are you in the UK where a "planer" is the device that in the US is known
as a "jointer" and the "thicknesser" is the device that in the US is
known as a "planer"?

Because a US "planer" does little to correct bow or twist unless you
construct a special sled to support the board in the bowed or twisted
state.


======================

Or his tension rollers are shot and not working


--

Eric

On 6/14/11 7:48 PM, CW wrote:
> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On 6/14/11 11:37 AM, WW wrote:
>>>
>>> 1 Concave side down through thickness planer.
>>> 2 Turn board over and run through thickness planer.
>>> 3 Run lengthwise on table saw.
>>> 4 Flip board and run lengthwise on other edge.
>>> 5 Square ends on chop saw.
>>>
>>> Am I missing something here? WW
>>>
>>
>> AFAIK, the reason you don't start on the planer is because it does
>> nothing to correct any bow or twist along the board's length.
>
>
> Yes it does.
>

The only way it would is if you were using some sort of a sled.
Short of that, you may thinks it's correcting a bow or twist, but it's
not.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On 6/14/11 7:50 PM, CW wrote:
> "dpb"<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> WW wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>
>>>>
>>> Thanks Mike. I only do this on cupped boards. WW
>> ...
>>
>>
>> And unless the board is awfully thick so it doesn't flex at all under the
>> pressure of feed roller you still have a (somewhat) cupped board when
>> done...
>>
> Nope. Flat.
>

You can take out a cup. I've done that all the time.
You can't take out a bow or twist.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On 6/15/11 12:37 AM, CW wrote:
> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On 6/14/11 7:48 PM, CW wrote:
>>> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> On 6/14/11 11:37 AM, WW wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1 Concave side down through thickness planer.
>>>>> 2 Turn board over and run through thickness planer.
>>>>> 3 Run lengthwise on table saw.
>>>>> 4 Flip board and run lengthwise on other edge.
>>>>> 5 Square ends on chop saw.
>>>>>
>>>>> Am I missing something here? WW
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> AFAIK, the reason you don't start on the planer is because it does
>>>> nothing to correct any bow or twist along the board's length.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes it does.
>>>
>>
>> The only way it would is if you were using some sort of a sled.
>> Short of that, you may thinks it's correcting a bow or twist, but it's
>> not.
>>
>>
>> --
> As I said in a previous post, there was going to be someone out there that
> tells me what I have been doing for years doesn't work. Having been a
> professional machinist and tool maker for the past 25 years, have the
> concept of flat, paralel and square are pretty well down. Yes, it works. If
> it doesn't work for you, you aren't doing it right.
>

I believe we may just have a misunderstanding concerning terminology.
A planer will correct cupping, just fine.

It won't correct bow or twist on any board longer than, probably 2 feet.
It's just not possible on a normal planer that most woodworkers have in
their shops.
"Having been a professional machinist and tool maker for the past 25
years," perhaps you've been using a planer with some super long bed and
two sets of rollers or something.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On 6/15/11 12:39 AM, CW wrote:
> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On 6/14/11 7:50 PM, CW wrote:
>>> "dpb"<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>>>> WW wrote:
>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks Mike. I only do this on cupped boards. WW
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And unless the board is awfully thick so it doesn't flex at all under
>>>> the
>>>> pressure of feed roller you still have a (somewhat) cupped board when
>>>> done...
>>>>
>>> Nope. Flat.
>>>
>>
>> You can take out a cup. I've done that all the time.
>> You can't take out a bow or twist.
>>
> No, YOU probably can't but I do it all the time.
>

I'm hearing some quote from My Cousin Vinnie about Jack and him magic
bean stalk means. :-)

Since this group is supposed to be about sharing of ideas and learning
and all that, I think it would great of you to share the wisdom of your
technique for this process with us lowly ignorant masses. A video would
be great.

Otherwise, I'm calling bull$h!t. :-)


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On 6/15/11 7:31 AM, Swingman wrote:
> On 6/14/2011 11:07 PM, Puckdropper wrote:
>
>> Could you elaborate a bit on that technique? My technique is pretty much
>> home schooled as well, and I'd like to try to improve it.
>
> In addition to what Lew said, and one of the key points, as I was taught
> in woodshop... the best results can be obtained by keeping the majority
> of any downward pressure necessary to control the stock on the _outfeed_
> table.
>

Very true. I've also found, concerning downward pressure, the lighter
the better.
Too much downward pressure and you take the bow out, essentially doing
what we're all saying a planer does, removing material from the entire
length.

I certainly could use all the (good) planer technique advice I can get,
so keep it coming.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On 6/15/11 12:07 PM, CW wrote:
> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On 6/15/11 12:37 AM, CW wrote:
>>> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>
>>
>> I believe we may just have a misunderstanding concerning terminology.
>> A planer will correct cupping, just fine.
>
> Nope.
>
>>
>> It won't correct bow or twist on any board longer than, probably 2 feet.
>
> Yes it will.
>
>> It's just not possible on a normal planer that most woodworkers have in
>> their shops.
>
> Yes it is.
>
>
>> "Having been a professional machinist and tool maker for the past 25
>> years," perhaps you've been using a planer with some super long bed and
>> two sets of rollers or something.
>>
>
>
> Delta 22-560
>

Put up or shut, then. Let's see some video.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

In article <[email protected]>, "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>[email protected] says...
>>
>> "-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> > On 6/15/11 12:37 AM, CW wrote:
>> >> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >>
>> >
>> > I believe we may just have a misunderstanding concerning terminology.
>> > A planer will correct cupping, just fine.
>>
>> Nope.
>>
>> >
>> > It won't correct bow or twist on any board longer than, probably 2 feet.
>>
>> Yes it will.
>>
>> > It's just not possible on a normal planer that most woodworkers have in
>> > their shops.
>>
>> Yes it is.
>>
>>
>> > "Having been a professional machinist and tool maker for the past 25
>> > years," perhaps you've been using a planer with some super long bed and
>> > two sets of rollers or something.
>> >
>>
>>
>> Delta 22-560
>
>I have one of those and it has corrected cupping just fine on many
>occasions but it has never done a damned thing for bow or twist.
>
>Sorry, but you're either mistaken or lying.

Maybe he's using shims and a sled?

>

On 6/15/11 1:26 PM, Leon wrote:
> On 6/15/2011 1:13 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
>> On 6/15/11 12:07 PM, CW wrote:
>>> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> On 6/15/11 12:37 AM, CW wrote:
>>>>> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I believe we may just have a misunderstanding concerning terminology.
>>>> A planer will correct cupping, just fine.
>>>
>>> Nope.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> It won't correct bow or twist on any board longer than, probably 2
>>>> feet.
>>>
>>> Yes it will.
>>>
>>>> It's just not possible on a normal planer that most woodworkers have in
>>>> their shops.
>>>
>>> Yes it is.
>>>
>>>
>>>> "Having been a professional machinist and tool maker for the past 25
>>>> years," perhaps you've been using a planer with some super long bed and
>>>> two sets of rollers or something.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Delta 22-560
>>>
>>
>> Put up or shut, then. Let's see some video.
>>
>>
> You can use a sled that will support the warped/twisted/cupped board.
> The planer will flatten that board.

I asked if he used a sled, he said nope.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On 6/15/11 2:06 PM, Doug Miller wrote:
> In article<[email protected]>, "J. Clarke"<[email protected]> wrote:
>> In article<[email protected]>,
>> [email protected] says...
>>>
>>> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> On 6/15/11 12:37 AM, CW wrote:
>>>>> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I believe we may just have a misunderstanding concerning terminology.
>>>> A planer will correct cupping, just fine.
>>>
>>> Nope.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> It won't correct bow or twist on any board longer than, probably 2 feet.
>>>
>>> Yes it will.
>>>
>>>> It's just not possible on a normal planer that most woodworkers have in
>>>> their shops.
>>>
>>> Yes it is.
>>>
>>>
>>>> "Having been a professional machinist and tool maker for the past 25
>>>> years," perhaps you've been using a planer with some super long bed and
>>>> two sets of rollers or something.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Delta 22-560
>>
>> I have one of those and it has corrected cupping just fine on many
>> occasions but it has never done a damned thing for bow or twist.
>>
>> Sorry, but you're either mistaken or lying.
>
> Maybe he's using shims and a sled?
>

I asked about a sled and he said no.
You'd think a reasonable person would say,
"You can do it with shims or sled... that's how I do it."


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On 6/15/11 2:09 PM, CW wrote:
> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> Since this group is supposed to be about sharing of ideas and learning
>> and all that, I think it would great of you to share the wisdom of your
>> technique for this process with us lowly ignorant masses. A video would
>> be great.
>
>
> An explanation wouldn't it. You would have to see it.
>

Bullshit. If you're not willing to explain it, you shouldn't be here.

If all you're going to say is, "Well, *I* can do it, and if you can't
can't, you're just a poopyhead," then everyone in here is going to call
you on your bullshit. Either the bullshit of lying about it or the
bullshit of being a douche-bag by not explaining how you do it.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

In article <[email protected]>, Stuart <[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
> J. Clarke <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Are you in the UK where a "planer" is the device that in the US is known
>> as a "jointer" and the "thicknesser" is the device that in the US is
>> known as a "planer"?
>
>Now I'm even more confused.
>
>I have here a planer/thicknesser. The top is an Aluminium bed with a slot
>running across it at right angles, through which blades protrude which
>rotate at high speed. I pass timber along the bed and the blades remove
>wood, flatening the timber - hopefully! That's a planer.

In the USA, we call that a jointer.

And the wood that we use for cabinetmaking, we call "lumber". "Timber", here,
means standing trees which will eventually become lumber. "Timber" is also
used, less frequently, to refer to very large wooden beams.
>
>Beneath the bed there is an aperture running through the body of the machine,
>having a platform which can be raised up towards the underside of the bed
>and hence the rotating blades. The platforn height controls the amount of
>wood removed from the top side of any timber passed through it and hence its
>resulting thickness. That's a thicknesser.

In the USA, we call that a planer.
>
>However, mostly I just reach for my Stanley No7.
>
We call that a plane -- as I imagine you do too.

On 6/15/11 9:07 PM, Hoosierpopi wrote:
>
>> 1 Concave side down through thickness planer.
>> 2 Turn board over and run through thickness planer.
>
> I, too, thought this approach would suffice.
> I mean, if you have a planer, why use a joiner?
> And, if the board is wide enough, wouldn't a joiner be insufficient
> for the task? Mine is about 4"
>
> Frankly, I don't understand how to flatten a six-inch wide board using
> a joiner - but I'm no expert (at anything).
>

We're not talking about just cupping.
We're talking about bow and twist, as well.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

In article <0d8e665f-f5cb-4c01-9c06-07d6c8ea3b70@q12g2000prb.googlegroups.com>, Hoosierpopi <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> 1 Concave side down through thickness planer.
>> 2 Turn board over and run through thickness planer.
>
>I, too, thought this approach would suffice.

No.

>I mean, if you have a planer, why use a joiner?

*jointer

Because a planer makes the opposite faces of a board parallel. By itself, it
can't make either one of them straight. If one face of the board is already
straight and flat before going into the planer, the board will come out like
this || but if it looks like this (< going in, it will look like this ((
coming out.

>And, if the board is wide enough, wouldn't a joiner be insufficient
>for the task? Mine is about 4"

A jointer *alone* is insufficient for the task of squaring rough lumber,
regardless of the sizes of either the jointer or the board: a jointer makes
one face of a board straight and flat, but it can't make opposite faces
parallel -- the reference surface and the cutting surface are on the same side
of the board. You can joint one face of a board straight and flat, but if you
flip it over and joint the other face, you have *no* guarantee that the two
faces are parallel.

If the board is wider than the jointer, there are several approaches,
including (but not necessarily limited to):
- rip the board into section(s) narrow enough for the jointer, surface them
separately, and edge-glue them back into a single plank
- take it to someone who has a jointer wide enough
- joint by hand with a jointer plane
- build a sled for your thickness planer, shim the board on the sled
appropriately, and flatten it in the planer.
>
>Frankly, I don't understand how to flatten a six-inch wide board using
>a joiner - but I'm no expert (at anything).

There are lots of tutorials available on the web; Google is your friend here.
Of course, the simplest method of flattening a six-inch board using a jointer
begins with getting a six-inch jointer...

In article <[email protected]>, "WW" <[email protected]> wrote:

>1 Concave side down through thickness planer.
>2 Turn board over and run through thickness planer.
>3 Run lengthwise on table saw.
>4 Flip board and run lengthwise on other edge.
>5 Square ends on chop saw.
>
>Am I missing something here? WW

Yes, you are:

Steps 1 and 2: if the board is twisted, bowed, or warped going into the
thickness planer, it will be twisted, bowed, or warped coming out, too.

Steps 3 and 4: if the board is still twisted, bowed, or warped at this stage,
ripping it on the table saw is simply *begging* for a kickback.

Step 5: if the board is still twisted, bowed, or warped at this stage, you
won't get square cuts on the chop saw.

Long story short -- planers won't correct twist, bow, or warp. That's what a
jointer (or a jointer plane) is for.

In article <[email protected]>, "CW" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>The way I do it too. Never found a need for a jointer. Can't see ever having
>the need for one unless (1) I was doing production work. (2) I was buying
>realy crap lumber.
>Productiobn work I don't do. Crappy lumber I don't buy. Now, how long will
>it take for someone to get on here and tell me that my method won't work and
>can't work?

I guess it depends on your definition of "work".

Ten or fifteen years ago, I formulated these rules of thumb based on actual
measurements and observations:

1. If something is out of square/plumb/level/parallel by one part in 100, it's
immediately obvious to a casual, untrained observer. IOW, 99% accuracy is
*not* good enough.

2. If it's out by one part in 200, it will be readily visible to anyone who's
looking for flaws.

3. If it's out by one part in 400, it's visible to a particularly discerning
eye.

4. If it's out by one part in 800, it's not visible, but can be found by
measuring.

5. If it's out by one part in 1600, see rule 4, but use precision instruments.

If you don't use a jointer -- or some equivalent method such as a good jointer
plane, a planer sled, a jointing jig for a router, etc. -- you're *not* going
to get any better than Rule 2.

In article <[email protected]>, "CW" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>, "CW"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>The way I do it too. Never found a need for a jointer. Can't see ever
>>>having
>>>the need for one unless (1) I was doing production work. (2) I was buying
>>>realy crap lumber.
>>>Productiobn work I don't do. Crappy lumber I don't buy. Now, how long will
>>>it take for someone to get on here and tell me that my method won't work
>>>and
>>>can't work?
>>
>> I guess it depends on your definition of "work".
>>
>> Ten or fifteen years ago, I formulated these rules of thumb based on
>> actual
>> measurements and observations:
>>
>> 1. If something is out of square/plumb/level/parallel by one part in 100,
>> it's
>> immediately obvious to a casual, untrained observer. IOW, 99% accuracy is
>> *not* good enough.
>>
>> 2. If it's out by one part in 200, it will be readily visible to anyone
>> who's
>> looking for flaws.
>>
>> 3. If it's out by one part in 400, it's visible to a particularly
>> discerning
>> eye.
>>
>> 4. If it's out by one part in 800, it's not visible, but can be found by
>> measuring.
>>
>> 5. If it's out by one part in 1600, see rule 4, but use precision
>> instruments.
>>
>> If you don't use a jointer -- or some equivalent method such as a good
>> jointer
>> plane, a planer sled, a jointing jig for a router, etc. -- you're *not*
>> going
>> to get any better than Rule 2.
>
>Bull shit.

Well, you're the one who keeps claiming to square lumber perfectly without a
jointer, but refuses to say how, so I'm sure you're the expert on bullshit
here.

> BTW, how did yoiu get out of my bozo bin?

Problem's obviously on your end. I've been using the same ID for a *long*
time. So who's the bozo?

In article <[email protected]>, Stuart <[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
> Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >I have here a planer/thicknesser. The top is an Aluminium bed with a
>> >slot running across it at right angles, through which blades protrude
>> >which rotate at high speed. I pass timber along the bed and the blades
>> >remove wood, flatening the timber - hopefully! That's a planer.
>
>> In the USA, we call that a jointer.
>
>Reading this group for quite a while now, I had always assumed the term
>referred to some some sort of machine for cutting various joints in
>wood. That's what the name suggests.

Well, now you know what the Americans on the group are talking about. :-)
>
>> And the wood that we use for cabinetmaking, we call "lumber". "Timber",
>> here, means standing trees which will eventually become lumber.
>> "Timber" is also used, less frequently, to refer to very large wooden
>> beams.
>
>Timber:
> "(n) wood suitable for building or carpentry whether growing or
>cut, a beam or large piece of wood in a framework, as of a house, ship &c"
>
>Lumber:
> "(n) Furniture stored away out of use: anything cumbersome or
>useless"
>
>Yes, I have become accustomed to the (mis-)use of these words round here.

Apparently those definitions came from a UK dictionary, perhaps the OED?

These are from the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language
(perhaps misnamed; ... of the American Language might be a better title):

Timber: "Trees or wooded land considered as a source of wood."
Lumber: "Timber sawed into boards, planks, or structural members... "
>
>> >Beneath the bed there is an aperture running through the body of the
>> >machine, having a platform which can be raised up towards the underside
>> >of the bed and hence the rotating blades. The platform height controls
>> >the amount of wood removed from the top side of any timber passed
>> >through it and hence its resulting thickness. That's a thicknesser.
>
>> In the USA, we call that a planer.
>
>You really are a strange lot.

We often think that about you too. :-) What was it Churchill called us, two
countries divided by a common language?
>
>> >However, mostly I just reach for my Stanley No7.
>
>> We call that a plane -- as I imagine you do too.
>
>Actually, with its length of 22" it's known as
>
> <g>
>
>a jointer!
>
>Yes it's a plane.
>
Actually, planes that long are called "jointer planes" here. And that doesn't
create any confusion for us at all.

Hard to live your own lessons, Dougy?

--------------

"Doug Miller" wrote in message news:[email protected]...

In article <[email protected]>, "CW"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>, "CW"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>The way I do it too. Never found a need for a jointer. Can't see ever
>>>having
>>>the need for one unless (1) I was doing production work. (2) I was buying
>>>realy crap lumber.
>>>Productiobn work I don't do. Crappy lumber I don't buy. Now, how long
>>>will
>>>it take for someone to get on here and tell me that my method won't work
>>>and
>>>can't work?
>>
>> I guess it depends on your definition of "work".
>>
>> Ten or fifteen years ago, I formulated these rules of thumb based on
>> actual
>> measurements and observations:
>>
>> 1. If something is out of square/plumb/level/parallel by one part in 100,
>> it's
>> immediately obvious to a casual, untrained observer. IOW, 99% accuracy is
>> *not* good enough.
>>
>> 2. If it's out by one part in 200, it will be readily visible to anyone
>> who's
>> looking for flaws.
>>
>> 3. If it's out by one part in 400, it's visible to a particularly
>> discerning
>> eye.
>>
>> 4. If it's out by one part in 800, it's not visible, but can be found by
>> measuring.
>>
>> 5. If it's out by one part in 1600, see rule 4, but use precision
>> instruments.
>>
>> If you don't use a jointer -- or some equivalent method such as a good
>> jointer
>> plane, a planer sled, a jointing jig for a router, etc. -- you're *not*
>> going
>> to get any better than Rule 2.
>
>Bull shit.

Well, you're the one who keeps claiming to square lumber perfectly without a
jointer, but refuses to say how, so I'm sure you're the expert on bullshit
here.

> BTW, how did yoiu get out of my bozo bin?

Problem's obviously on your end. I've been using the same ID for a *long*
time. So who's the bozo?

Dougy knows everything about everybody.

------------------------

"Doug Miller" wrote in message news:[email protected]...

In article <[email protected]>, Stuart <[email protected]>
wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
> Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >I have here a planer/thicknesser. The top is an Aluminium bed with a
>> >slot running across it at right angles, through which blades protrude
>> >which rotate at high speed. I pass timber along the bed and the blades
>> >remove wood, flatening the timber - hopefully! That's a planer.
>
>> In the USA, we call that a jointer.
>
>Reading this group for quite a while now, I had always assumed the term
>referred to some some sort of machine for cutting various joints in
>wood. That's what the name suggests.

Well, now you know what the Americans on the group are talking about. :-)
>
>> And the wood that we use for cabinetmaking, we call "lumber". "Timber",
>> here, means standing trees which will eventually become lumber.
>> "Timber" is also used, less frequently, to refer to very large wooden
>> beams.
>
>Timber:
> "(n) wood suitable for building or carpentry whether growing or
>cut, a beam or large piece of wood in a framework, as of a house, ship &c"
>
>Lumber:
> "(n) Furniture stored away out of use: anything cumbersome or
>useless"
>
>Yes, I have become accustomed to the (mis-)use of these words round here.

Apparently those definitions came from a UK dictionary, perhaps the OED?

These are from the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language
(perhaps misnamed; ... of the American Language might be a better title):

Timber: "Trees or wooded land considered as a source of wood."
Lumber: "Timber sawed into boards, planks, or structural members... "
>
>> >Beneath the bed there is an aperture running through the body of the
>> >machine, having a platform which can be raised up towards the underside
>> >of the bed and hence the rotating blades. The platform height controls
>> >the amount of wood removed from the top side of any timber passed
>> >through it and hence its resulting thickness. That's a thicknesser.
>
>> In the USA, we call that a planer.
>
>You really are a strange lot.

We often think that about you too. :-) What was it Churchill called us, two
countries divided by a common language?
>
>> >However, mostly I just reach for my Stanley No7.
>
>> We call that a plane -- as I imagine you do too.
>
>Actually, with its length of 22" it's known as
>
> <g>
>
>a jointer!
>
>Yes it's a plane.
>
Actually, planes that long are called "jointer planes" here. And that
doesn't
create any confusion for us at all.

On 6/15/2011 1:37 AM, CW wrote:

> As I said in a previous post, there was going to be someone out there that
> tells me what I have been doing for years doesn't work. Having been a
> professional machinist and tool maker for the past 25 years, have the
> concept of flat, paralel and square are pretty well down. Yes, it works. If
> it doesn't work for you, you aren't doing it right.

Let me see if I got this technique right:

Buy perfectly flat wood to begin with, instead of "crappy" wood.
Run flat perfect wood through the planer, and end up with perfectly flat
planed wood...

Seems simple enough, and I doubt anyone would say this technique won't work.

Most if not all know the planer is not the tool to straighten
non-perfect, crappy wood. The correct tool is the jointer, hand or
motorized or you could buy a $30,000 cnc machine like Robocop has.
Planer ain't it, whether you can make do with it or not.

--
Jack
You Can't Fix Stupid, but You Can Vote it Out!
http://jbstein.com

On 6/15/2011 11:20 PM, Doug Miller wrote:

> Ten or fifteen years ago, I formulated these rules of thumb based on actual
> measurements and observations:
>
> 1. If something is out of square/plumb/level/parallel by one part in 100, it's
> immediately obvious to a casual, untrained observer. IOW, 99% accuracy is
> *not* good enough.

That would be .01 correct?

I recently, in an uncontrolled spending spree, bought a Wixie angle
gauge. I checked my table saw blade and fence, jointer fence, band saw
table and every one, which I always set up with my dads very, very old
and well used combination/tri square, were either 89.9° or 90.1°. I
reset them to exactly 90.0° which was so minimal (1/10th of a degree) as
to be meaningless in my opinion. I then read the package and the Wixie
is accurate to .1 degree, so I'm thinking there is even money on who was
right, but at least I know my set up skills over the past 40 years is
just as accurate as the fancy Wixie digital age gauge. My table saw
fence was exactly 90°

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your accuracy table, and for sure I'm not a
machinist so when working with wood, 1/32 is as close as my eyes let me
measure with any degree of accuracy.

Furthermore, I also recently bought a digital caliber at HF. It works
great except it is way too accurate for me. Everything is like
87/124ths or similar, and I'm more interested in 11/16ths. I'd really
like one that you could adjust the accuracy to what you need, and I
always have trouble looking for an 87/124ths drill bit:-)

> 2. If it's out by one part in 200, it will be readily visible to
> anyone who's looking for flaws.

5/1000ths of an inch? Really?

--
Jack
A wink is as good as a nod to a blind horse
http://jbstein.com



> 3. If it's out by one part in 400, it's visible to a particularly discerning
> eye.
>
> 4. If it's out by one part in 800, it's not visible, but can be found by
> measuring.
>
> 5. If it's out by one part in 1600, see rule 4, but use precision instruments.
>
> If you don't use a jointer -- or some equivalent method such as a good jointer
> plane, a planer sled, a jointing jig for a router, etc. -- you're *not* going
> to get any better than Rule 2.

On 6/16/11 11:13 AM, Jack Stein wrote:
> Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your accuracy table, and for sure I'm not a
> machinist so when working with wood, 1/32 is as close as my eyes let me
> measure with any degree of accuracy.
>

Obviously, it depends on the length between to two points of reference.
1/32" difference on the width of a 5' board? Please.
1/32" difference in thickness of a 1/4" thick piece of molding 5" long?
Most of us could see that, but I'm still with you.


> Furthermore, I also recently bought a digital caliber at HF. It works
> great except it is way too accurate for me. Everything is like 87/124ths
> or similar, and I'm more interested in 11/16ths. I'd really like one
> that you could adjust the accuracy to what you need, and I always have
> trouble looking for an 87/124ths drill bit:-)
>

You just need to get your drill bits from harbor freight, too!
Last time I got harbor freight bits, there was an 87/124ths bit and lots
of other xx/124th bits. :-)


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 06:22:35 -0700, Robatoy wrote:

>> Sawn, surely!
>>
>>
> Surely.
>
> Quarter sawn lumber. Sawed off shotgun.

Ah, but you're forgetting the "regularization" of verbs promoted by the
publishing industry :-). I still wince when I hear things like "pleaded"
instead of "pled" and the like.

P.S. My Pan spell checker even says pled is not a word! Nor is sawn.

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

In article <[email protected]>, Stuart <[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
> Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Lumber: "Timber sawed into boards, planks, or structural members... "
> ^^^^^
>Sawn, surely!

Oddly enough, we use the word "sawn" but primarily as an adjective:
quarter-sawn, rough-sawn, plain-sawn, etc. The past tense of "saw" is usually
"sawed" in American English.

In article <[email protected]>, Jack Stein <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 6/15/2011 11:20 PM, Doug Miller wrote:
>
>> Ten or fifteen years ago, I formulated these rules of thumb based on actual
>> measurements and observations:
>>
>> 1. If something is out of square/plumb/level/parallel by one part in 100,
> it's
>> immediately obvious to a casual, untrained observer. IOW, 99% accuracy is
>> *not* good enough.
>
>That would be .01 correct?

Yes.
[...]
>
>Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your accuracy table, and for sure I'm not a
>machinist so when working with wood, 1/32 is as close as my eyes let me
>measure with any degree of accuracy.

I'm not talking about measuring dimensions. I'm talking about relative
proportions.
[...]
>
> > 2. If it's out by one part in 200, it will be readily visible to
> > anyone who's looking for flaws.
>
>5/1000ths of an inch? Really?

You misunderstand.

Suppose you've constructed a frame of some sort -- say a cabinet carcase --
and you want to make sure it's square. Measuring the diagonals is an easy way
to check for square. If one diagonal is, say, 20", and the other is 20.1"
(one-tenth part in twenty, or one part in 200), that carcase will be visibly
not square. If it's out by one part in 100, e.g. one diagonal 19.9" and the
other 20.1", it will be not merely visibly, but *obviously*, out of square.
>

On 6/16/11 12:49 PM, Doug Miller wrote:
> In article<[email protected]>, Stuart<[email protected]> wrote:
>> In article<[email protected]>,
>> Doug Miller<[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Lumber: "Timber sawed into boards, planks, or structural members... "
>> ^^^^^
>> Sawn, surely!
>
> Oddly enough, we use the word "sawn" but primarily as an adjective:
> quarter-sawn, rough-sawn, plain-sawn, etc. The past tense of "saw" is usually
> "sawed" in American English.
>
I sawed that coming :-)

--
Froz...


The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.

On 6/16/2011 1:27 AM, CW wrote:
> "Doug Miller"<[email protected]> wrote in message

> Bull shit. BTW, how did yoiu get out of my bozo bin? Don't answer. You're
> heading back in right know.

That should scare the hell out of him...

--
Jack
If I agreed with you we'd both be wrong.
http://jbstein.com

In article <[email protected]>, willshak <[email protected]> wrote:
>Doug Miller wrote the following:
>> In article <[email protected]>, Stuart <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>> Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Lumber: "Timber sawed into boards, planks, or structural members... "
>>>>
>>> ^^^^^
>>> Sawn, surely!
>>>
>>
>> Oddly enough, we use the word "sawn" but primarily as an adjective:
>> quarter-sawn, rough-sawn, plain-sawn, etc. The past tense of "saw" is usually
>> "sawed" in American English.
>>
>
>It is past participle of the word 'saw', just like the past participle
>of the word 'blow' is 'blown'.
>Blow the house down.
>The wind blew the house down.
>The house was blown down, not blowed down.

OK, then, if "saw" follows the same rules as "blow":
- Saw the tree down.
- The logger sew the tree down.
Oops. I don't think that works.

There's nothing wrong with saying "The tree was sawed down, and then the log
was sawed into boards."

On 6/16/11 2:15 PM, Robatoy wrote:
> On Jun 16, 3:00 pm, willshak<[email protected]> wrote:
>> Doug Miller wrote the following:
>>
>>> In article<[email protected]>, Stuart<[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>> In article<[email protected]>,
>>>> Doug Miller<[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>>> Lumber: "Timber sawed into boards, planks, or structural members... "
>>
>>>> ^^^^^
>>>> Sawn, surely!
>>
>>> Oddly enough, we use the word "sawn" but primarily as an adjective:
>>> quarter-sawn, rough-sawn, plain-sawn, etc. The past tense of "saw" is usually
>>> "sawed" in American English.
>>
>> It is past participle of the word 'saw', just like the past participle
>> of the word 'blow' is 'blown'.
>> Blow the house down.
>> The wind blew the house down.
>> The house was blown down, not blowed down.
>>
> Different word.
> Mouse mice, House houses.
>

Get it right, man.... sheesh.....
Moose, moosen or meese
box, boxen

Whatever you call it, it's fun to get blowed.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On 6/16/2011 3:55 PM, -MIKE- wrote:

> Whatever you call it, it's fun to get blowed.

Getting blown doesn't suck much either...

--
Jack
Got Change: And the Change SUCKS!
http://jbstein.com

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] wrote:
>On 6/16/11 2:15 PM, Robatoy wrote:
>> On Jun 16, 3:00 pm, willshak<[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Doug Miller wrote the following:
>>>
>>>> In article<[email protected]>, Stuart<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> In article<[email protected]>,
>>>>> Doug Miller<[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> Lumber: "Timber sawed into boards, planks, or structural members... "
>>>
>>>>> ^^^^^
>>>>> Sawn, surely!
>>>
>>>> Oddly enough, we use the word "sawn" but primarily as an adjective:
>>>> quarter-sawn, rough-sawn, plain-sawn, etc. The past tense of "saw" is
> usually
>>>> "sawed" in American English.
>>>
>>> It is past participle of the word 'saw', just like the past participle
>>> of the word 'blow' is 'blown'.
>>> Blow the house down.
>>> The wind blew the house down.
>>> The house was blown down, not blowed down.
>>>
>> Different word.
>> Mouse mice, House houses.

Yeah, that gets confusing. If more than one mouse is "mice", is more than one
spouse, "spice"?

Doug Miller wrote,on my timestamp of 17/06/2011 1:04 PM:

>>>>
>>>> It is past participle of the word 'saw', just like the past participle
>>>> of the word 'blow' is 'blown'.
>>>> Blow the house down.
>>>> The wind blew the house down.
>>>> The house was blown down, not blowed down.
>>>>
>>> Different word.
>>> Mouse mice, House houses.
>
> Yeah, that gets confusing. If more than one mouse is "mice", is more than one
> spouse, "spice"?

"i" before "e" except after "c".
Just like in "weird science".
It's all simple and logical.
(NOT!) ;)

On 6/16/11 10:20 PM, Noons wrote:
> "i" before "e" except after "c".
> Just like in "weird science".
>

That's great.

From my favorite comedian, Brian Regan...
"I before e except after c and when sounding like 'A' as in neighbor and
weigh, and on weekends and holidays and all throughout May, and you'll
always be wrong no matter what you say!"




--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

-MIKE- wrote,on my timestamp of 17/06/2011 1:40 PM:

> That's great.
>
> From my favorite comedian, Brian Regan...
> "I before e except after c and when sounding like 'A' as in neighbor and
> weigh, and on weekends and holidays and all throughout May, and you'll
> always be wrong no matter what you say!"


LOL! Awesome!

In article <[email protected]>, "Pete S" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
><snip>
>> Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:

Be careful with the attributions, please. I didn't write this:
>>> >I have here a planer/thicknesser. The top is an Aluminium bed with a
>>> >slot running across it at right angles, through which blades protrude
>>> >which rotate at high speed. I pass timber along the bed and the blades
>>> >remove wood, flatening the timber - hopefully! That's a planer.
>>

I wrote this:
>>> In the USA, we call that a jointer.
>>
><snip>
>
>Doug Miller, I think, said that his machine had "AN aluminum bed---".

Nope, that was the guy I was responding to.

> If
>that bed is all at the same height, both infeed and outfeed ends, then it IS
>a planer, isn't it? A jointer has two separate beds (tables). The infeed
>is usually set a little lower than the outfeed. The cutter head is set at
>the same height as the outfeed.

I think his description was pretty clear. He's describing a combo machine with
the jointer on top and the thickness planer below -- rare in North America,
but I understand they're pretty common in Europe.

"Pete S" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...


<snip>
> Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >I have here a planer/thicknesser. The top is an Aluminium bed with a
>> >slot running across it at right angles, through which blades protrude
>> >which rotate at high speed. I pass timber along the bed and the blades
>> >remove wood, flatening the timber - hopefully! That's a planer.
>
>> In the USA, we call that a jointer.
>
<snip>

Doug Miller, I think, said that his machine had "AN aluminum bed---". If
that bed is all at the same height, both infeed and outfeed ends, then it IS
a planer, isn't it? A jointer has two separate beds (tables). The infeed
is usually set a little lower than the outfeed. The cutter head is set at
the same height as the outfeed.

Pete Stanaitis


==========================

A jointer is a type of planer, just not a ***thickness*** planer. This has
nothing to do with the metal used in the table.

--

Eric

Stuart <[email protected]> wrote:
: In article <[email protected]>,
: Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
:> >I have here a planer/thicknesser. The top is an Aluminium bed with a
:> >slot running across it at right angles, through which blades protrude
:> >which rotate at high speed. I pass timber along the bed and the blades
:> >remove wood, flatening the timber - hopefully! That's a planer.

:> In the USA, we call that a jointer.

: Reading this group for quite a while now, I had always assumed the term
: referred to some some sort of machine for cutting various joints in
: wood. That's what the name suggests.

:> And the wood that we use for cabinetmaking, we call "lumber". "Timber",
:> here, means standing trees which will eventually become lumber.
:> "Timber" is also used, less frequently, to refer to very large wooden
:> beams.

: Timber:
: "(n) wood suitable for building or carpentry whether growing or
: cut, a beam or large piece of wood in a framework, as of a house, ship &c"
:
: Lumber:
: "(n) Furniture stored away out of use: anything cumbersome or
: useless"

: Yes, I have become accustomed to the (mis-)use of these words round here.


If you had read the full page at the OED from which you got that definition,
you'd have seen the first specific North American definition, listed as

" 3. N. Amer. Timber sawn into rough planks or otherwise roughly prepared for the market."
(Oxford English Dictionary)"

Juat out of curiosity, is "lumber" still used in the sense that
you're using it (definition 1 of OED)? Or are you being contrary?


-- Andy BArss

Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote:
: On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 06:22:35 -0700, Robatoy wrote:

:>> Sawn, surely!
:>>
:>>
:> Surely.
:>
:> Quarter sawn lumber. Sawed off shotgun.

: Ah, but you're forgetting the "regularization" of verbs promoted by the
: publishing industry :-). I still wince when I hear things like "pleaded"
: instead of "pled" and the like.

Me too. Blech.

-- Andy Barss

On 6/14/2011 12:45 AM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> This may be of interest to some of you.
>
> Lew
> ----------------------------------
> EIGHT STEPS TO SQUARING LUMBER
>
> Courtesy of Cerritos College
>
> Step Process
> Machine
>
> 1 Rough cut piece to length +1" Radial Arm Saw
> 2 Surface one face (Concave side down) Jointer
> 3 Surface to desired thickness Planer
> 4 Joint one edge
> Jointer
> 5 Rip to desired width + 1/32" Table Saw
> 6 Joint ripped edge Jointer
> 7 Square one end Chop Saw
> or Table Saw
> 8 Square other end to desired length Chop Saw or
> Table Saw
>
>

I do find that interesting, using improper steps to compensate for
marginal equipment or technique I guess.

I recall many years ago, many many years ago ;~) one would get into a
heap of trouble in shop class if you returned to the jointer to try to
establish the board width with the jointer. Board edges could become
nonparallel without a fixed indexing surface like the a rip fence.

"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, "CW"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>The way I do it too. Never found a need for a jointer. Can't see ever
>>having
>>the need for one unless (1) I was doing production work. (2) I was buying
>>realy crap lumber.
>>Productiobn work I don't do. Crappy lumber I don't buy. Now, how long will
>>it take for someone to get on here and tell me that my method won't work
>>and
>>can't work?
>
> I guess it depends on your definition of "work".
>
> Ten or fifteen years ago, I formulated these rules of thumb based on
> actual
> measurements and observations:
>
> 1. If something is out of square/plumb/level/parallel by one part in 100,
> it's
> immediately obvious to a casual, untrained observer. IOW, 99% accuracy is
> *not* good enough.
>
> 2. If it's out by one part in 200, it will be readily visible to anyone
> who's
> looking for flaws.
>
> 3. If it's out by one part in 400, it's visible to a particularly
> discerning
> eye.
>
> 4. If it's out by one part in 800, it's not visible, but can be found by
> measuring.
>
> 5. If it's out by one part in 1600, see rule 4, but use precision
> instruments.
>
> If you don't use a jointer -- or some equivalent method such as a good
> jointer
> plane, a planer sled, a jointing jig for a router, etc. -- you're *not*
> going
> to get any better than Rule 2.

Bull shit. BTW, how did yoiu get out of my bozo bin? Don't answer. You're
heading back in right know.

"Leon" <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> You can use a sled that will support the warped/twisted/cupped board. The
> planer will flatten that board.

Useful in extreme cases but, if I had a board that bad off I would either
carve a propeller or throw it away. In any case, a few minutes with a hand
plane and it is flat enough for the planer.

"Larry Jaques" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 22:39:17 -0700, "CW" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>> On 6/14/11 7:50 PM, CW wrote:
>>>> "dpb"<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>>>>> WW wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks Mike. I only do this on cupped boards. WW
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And unless the board is awfully thick so it doesn't flex at all under
>>>>> the
>>>>> pressure of feed roller you still have a (somewhat) cupped board when
>>>>> done...
>>>>>
>>>> Nope. Flat.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You can take out a cup. I've done that all the time.
>>> You can't take out a bow or twist.
>>>
>>No, YOU probably can't but I do it all the time.
>
> Maybe we're considering bows and warps of 0.500" or more nd you're
> talking about a measly 0.004" or something...
>
Nope.

"-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 6/15/11 12:07 PM, CW wrote:
>> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> On 6/15/11 12:37 AM, CW wrote:
>>>> "-MIKE-"<[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>
>>> I believe we may just have a misunderstanding concerning terminology.
>>> A planer will correct cupping, just fine.
>>
>> Nope.
>>
>>>
>>> It won't correct bow or twist on any board longer than, probably 2 feet.
>>
>> Yes it will.
>>
>>> It's just not possible on a normal planer that most woodworkers have in
>>> their shops.
>>
>> Yes it is.
>>
>>
>>> "Having been a professional machinist and tool maker for the past 25
>>> years," perhaps you've been using a planer with some super long bed and
>>> two sets of rollers or something.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Delta 22-560
>>
>
> Put up or shut, then. Let's see some video.
>
>
You going to buy me the camera?

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 22:39:17 -0700, "CW" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>"-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On 6/14/11 7:50 PM, CW wrote:
>>> "dpb"<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>>>> WW wrote:
>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks Mike. I only do this on cupped boards. WW
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And unless the board is awfully thick so it doesn't flex at all under
>>>> the
>>>> pressure of feed roller you still have a (somewhat) cupped board when
>>>> done...
>>>>
>>> Nope. Flat.
>>>
>>
>> You can take out a cup. I've done that all the time.
>> You can't take out a bow or twist.
>>
>No, YOU probably can't but I do it all the time.

Maybe we're considering bows and warps of 0.500" or more nd you're
talking about a measly 0.004" or something...


--
"The history of temperature change over time is related to
the shape of the continents, the shape of the sea floor,
the pulling apart of the crust, the stitching back together
of the crust, the opening and closing of sea ways, changes
in the Earth's orbit, changes in solar energy, supernoval
eruptions, comet dust, impacts by comets and asteroids,
volcanic activity, bacteria, soil formation, sedimentation,
ocean currents, and the chemistry of air. If we humans, in
a fit of ego, think we can change these normal planetary
processes, then we need stronger medication."
--Ian Plimer
_Heaven and Earth: Global Warming, the Missing Science_