Some workbench questions

[Admiral]

I understand his rationale. I think he's wrong to be so dismissive. I mean, he even takes the red-neck cheap shot calling them "double-wide." Tell me again why that guy isn't a laughingstock?

I don't think Chris was being pejorative in his double wide comment, it just happens to match the size discussion.  He's also approaching this from the traditional "joiners" perspective, and frankly is correct in his comments.  On the other hand, what you are trying to do is end up with a double duty bench, one that you can work on in the traditional sense, but also be an assembly table, and this is driven from your space requirement.  Two entirely different functions from my perspective as a hand tool user, which will ultimately result in some stiff compromises in the utility of the bench for hand tool use.  I think this is what Chris is pointing out.  A bench is a personal choice, so have at it and make what works for you.  But if you choose to pursue a traditional bench design (which in the long run you may end up with if your interest in hand tool woodworking becomes a decades old pursuit), think about knockdown platform extensions at the bench height to give you the assembly table width you want. 

Also, in the end, I don't know of anyone who has not started with one bench, and built or bought another.  I think folks, including Chris, are just trying to give everyone the benefit of their experience, failed and successful, with how their bench choice evolved.  So laughingstock, no.  That being said, I certainly don't agree with everything Chris touts, but I've not seen him stumble over bench design or construction.

[Adnick]

Have several of his books, but his concepts have to be scrutinized. Most of his conclusions are taken from surviving historical examples and not a lot of workbenchs survived. Believe his biggest error is workbench height.

Thos Moser confirmed this for me when he said that if we built Shaker furniture based off of historical examples they would all look like they were built for children, people were on average 4" shorter back then! Glad my bench is almost 36" high.

Also like a wider bench, but work 360 deg around mine, one big advantage is just having room for the project tools that are scattered around the bench during a build, and I'm OCD about putting things away and cleaning up. However my bench is also a split top design and this allow me to have essentially 2 benches and temporary tool storage in the middle...

The picture he uses to get his narrow bench point across is scares me to death, those thin spindle chairs precariously perched on that bench.

I've followed him for most of his publishing career and he's a lot like me, had exposure to hand tools as a kid, but only really started working with them as an adult and only in avocational endeavors. Enjoy his writing style most of the time, but won't be building a too chest or Roman workbench anytime soon.


Andy
mos maiorum

[MattP]

Have several of his books, but his concepts have to be scrutinized.  Most of his conclusions are taken from surviving historical examples and not a lot of workbenchs survived.  Believe his biggest error is workbench height.

Thos Moser confirmed this for me when he said that if we built Shaker furniture based off of historical examples they would all look like they were built for children, people were on average 4" shorter back then!  Glad my bench is almost 36" high.

Also like a wider bench, but work 360 deg around mine, one big advantage is just having room for the project tools that are scattered around the bench during a build, and I'm OCD about putting things away and cleaning up.  However my bench is also a split top design and this allow me to have essentially 2 benches and temporary tool storage in the middle...

The picture he uses to get his narrow bench point across is scares me to death, those thin spindle chairs precariously perched on that bench.

I've followed him for most of his publishing career and he's a lot like me, had exposure to hand tools as a kid, but only really started working with them as an adult and only in avocational endeavors.  Enjoy his writing style most of the time, but won't be building a too chest or Roman workbench anytime soon.


Andy
 mos maiorum

I think his bench height recommendations are dangerous. I'm not a doctor, so that's not a medical opinion, but it is an informed opinion based on spending A LOT of time talking to doctors and human factors (ergonomics) psychologists back when I was practicing law. I'd be shocked if any sports medicine doctor or human factors researcher endorsed his recommendations. In fact, I'd be shocked if they failed to burn him at the stake for them.

As I have been thinking about my bench, I have been thinking about height, too, of course. I did the standing on boards thing to find my comfortable planing height. For edge jointing, my plane sole wanted to be 40" off the ground. I knew 30" was a nonstarter, but 40" seemed crazy, too. But that was what felt most comfortable. I haven't tried yet with face planing, and I am going to try again with the edge jointing, because that result just seemed outlandish.

[MattP]

I don't think Chris was being pejorative in his double wide comment, it just happens to match the size discussion.  He's also approaching this from the traditional "joiners" perspective, and frankly is correct in his comments.  On the other hand, what you are trying to do is end up with a double duty bench, one that you can work on in the traditional sense, but also be an assembly table, and this is driven from your space requirement.  Two entirely different functions from my perspective as a hand tool user, which will ultimately result in some stiff compromises in the utility of the bench for hand tool use.  I think this is what Chris is pointing out.  A bench is a personal choice, so have at it and make what works for you.  But if you choose to pursue a traditional bench design (which in the long run you may end up with if your interest in hand tool woodworking becomes a decades old pursuit), think about knockdown platform extensions at the bench height to give you the assembly table width you want. 

Also, in the end, I don't know of anyone who has not started with one bench, and built or bought another.  I think folks, including Chris, are just trying to give everyone the benefit of their experience, failed and successful, with how their bench choice evolved.  So laughingstock, no.  That being said, I certainly don't agree with everything Chris touts, but I've not seen him stumble over bench design or construction.

You're a good man, Admiral. I appreciate you giving him the benefit of the doubt like that. I don't. I think it was a very calculated insult to the very people who built the craft he claims to enjoy. But my disagreement with you is respectful, and I acknowledge I'm not a mind reader.

As for his recommendations, he said two things:

1. Your tools could roll out of reach. That's true, but only if you buy tools that are poorly designed. My old marples chisels have round handles, but for every one of them, the center of balance tips them onto the steel, preventing them from rolling far (if you push one to roll it [as I just went out to the garage to do], it goes in a circle--that's not an accident, I bet). My new marples have handles that are those rounded over square shapes. They won't roll. My carving chisels, which have steel light enough to keep the center of balance on the handle, have octagonal handles, which, again, can't roll. So, yeah, if you buy poorly designed tools, they can roll out of reach. 

That is, unless you prevent it with a couple of expedients: a. place your tool on the bench with the cutting edge facing away from you pointing 180 degrees from where you're standing. If you are not doing this as a safety matter, you're an accident waiting to happen, anyway. b. keep your rolling tools in a portable little carrying case of some kind. My plan for my tool cabinet is to build removable chisel storage racks that I can bring the chisels to the bench in. It's a safety measure, both my safety and the tool's (because a tool that can roll out of reach can more easily roll onto the floor).

Also, there is a simple solution when a tool rolls out of reach: you walk around the bench and get it.

Honestly, while I agree with the truthfulness of "a tool can roll out of reach" that most definitely falls into the category of first world problems I can't take seriously. Needing to glue up a 48" wide panel on a 22" bench--THAT's a problem I take seriously.

2. You can slip a drawer over the end of a narrow bench. Again, true for certain drawers, but: clamps. Again, another first world problem. 

I've been getting by on a bench that is inadequate to almost every task I have wanted to perform for so long now that "a tool rolled out of reach" or "the black surface of your proposed bench is going to absorb .0000278 lumens of the available light" strike me as frivolous, even absurd objections.

The last time I carved a bowl, I had to clamp a clamp in the bowl, put the clamp in the face vise, and then clamp the clamp to the vice. This mash up left me about 3" of work piece available, and had me undoing it every minute or two to expose new wood to carve. I crave the day where my worst problem is that I have to walk six feet to retrieve a tool that rolled out of reach.

Sorry for the rant. Certainly NOT aimed at you.

[Admiral]

OH, no worries on my end, opinions are like bellybuttons (i have a more obscene word, but you get the point), and everybody has one.  Like I said, a bench is a very personal thing and must fit your projected use patterns and space.

Edit PS:  I may tend to give him the benefit of the doubt on the double wide thing because I've met the man a couple of times (not that he would remember) and I don't see that sort of thing in him at all.  But I disagree with a fair amount of things he says as well.

[ez-duzit]

My principle workbench is a 4' x 8' assembly table which makes it easy for handling sheet goods and gluing up face frames and such. It also serves as the out-feed table for 2 of my table saws (one setup with 1/2" dado, the other with carbide rip blade). Beneath it, on 1 side, are a couple rollaway cabinets with the wheels removed; beneath it, on the other side, is one large shelf with space under for milk crates. 

 

[MattP]

Whoa, that thing is a BEAST.

[MattP]

I take it you're doing fairly large scale cabinet production work? I'm drooling over those outlets in the bench in the second photo. Just as a home for my mobile light that outlet would make me really happy.

[ez-duzit]

I customize yachts--all one of a kind--no production work.

The bench has power strips under both long sides, diagonally opposite each other. Turning on the power strip also turns on the fluorescent lights over the bench. Portable tools, like chop saw, small table saw, spindle sander..., are stored on the shelf under the far side. Vises are mounted on other benches, on the other side of the shop.

Another out-feed table (to my primary table saw and router table) is my secondary workbench. It has a woodworking vise, another power strip (again, that turns on the light over this area), rollaway cabinet and drawer unit. Also shown is a small woodworking bench with built-in vises.

As you can see everything is very much overcrowded to squeeze in woodworking, machining, welding, etc, into a space which is smaller than 2 double garages.

[hbmcc]

Bench design:

If you plan to futz and plane a lot, try a couple hours on a timber and sawhorses at various heights. I can give you the skinny on everything from sitting on steps to chairs to tailgates to sawhorses (virgin) at whatever height they are. My favorite is a lawn chair but only when using a block plane. (And, having a cool one at my side.) The important thing is to do final evaluation for a long time, on separate days. 

I discovered the flaw in Veritas tote design by doing height experiments. The tote angle demands a higher bench which forces more arm and upper body effort to plane. And, yes, layout and gluing always feel better when you are vertical; which is why there are separate layout tables and workbenches.  

Your project plans do benefit from a big work surface. So go for the 48 x 96 combo-work-layout top. You can always make the cute roubo and build jewelry boxes later.

As a designer giving free advice, you are welcome to go blind. But, a black work surface is far from cool. I don't know how many times I predicted the age of an architect/interior designer based on the surface colors they chose. Ask the senior attempting to travel through the spaces having dark surfaces what he prefers. Also, imagine how fun it is to rub work surface colors onto project wood. I even find oxidized scum from tools irritating. 

You should have discovered the nightmare of combining final fabrication and initial rough work on one surface. Schwarz is obviously OCD about cleanliness. He'd have a constant stream of broken body parts if he allowed work litter to stay on that hardwood floor. His ten-year-old Roubo looks as new as the publication date. I clean my sharpening stones with separate towels and routinely wash rags and pads. The killer for me has always been doing everything on one surface.

Enough rambling.