01-19-2017, 06:17 PM
Well now,
your negativity statement is untrue. Unless of course being able to do something you think is impossible to do with rudimentary tools like a stick. The only thing in my writing that you perceive as negative is the fact that you cannot get past your own bias.
I can set knives on a jointer with a stick. As far as a jointer goes I have a complete tutorial written with pics of how to do it with a stick. you can see it right here
You can set them with an expensive gauge. You have some words that are kinda meaningful and do not address the actual efforts it would take to use said gauge . Only that it is more accurate. I challenge this statement, my knives are true to the rotation within 1/2 of .001" using a stick.. Could I get closer? I usually do, but if one is out a half a thousandth I am not beating myself up over it.
So let's go a bit further which of the above is for the guy who has to replace a set knives and does it about 1 /10 the time I do? Would someone else choose on a weekend with no Woodcraft just down the road to buy a One Way and wait another week for it to arrive then try to decipher how to set knives with it? Then add in the fact that the kids need shoes this month for instance? what would you choose?
Additionally, setting knives is never an issue in a planer using the readily available gauge supplied with most planers. furthermore, to my knowledge you have yet to address how a one way is better or more accurate for setting knives in a stationary planer when I cannot even fathom how you can do it.
If a simple solution exists for the everyday person why not address that instead of promoting something that is not viable for most weekend woodworkers.
I will continue critiquing your writing, you really do need an editor. You cannot even acknowledge that metal can and will move given a set of circumstances that are proven and reliable. How can you as a machinist not allow for that and hold your .001" as a baseline for wood is beyond me....
Wood follows the similar rules but when it does the changes are more pronounced. Machines will never be able to account for that and setups can and do change over time... IOW variables abound that you have yet to address other than to say you can get mighty close but it will take a longer? IME there is a point where it works or it does not, I have seen it both ways.
Out of curiousity have you ever tried to fit 10 joints together in a four panel door if they are cut just right one day and on assembly day the moisture content in the glue and air has made that task much harder because you now have to double up clamps to pull the joinery together due to moisture expansion? You also have to factor in that glue has a finite open time and at some point you are going to be tasked with fitting three joints in that time period not once but twice?
How do you account for that? Stop what you are doing and trim every single joint a second time? That is silly when you can simply account for the glue by removing .004" from the joint at the tongue on day one. I work to a relatively common point and .001" is not it, so what if it is .005 or .006 it is still going together without a big hammer and twice as many clamps as you require....
I have done some pretty large production runs with far more complicated assemblies than what I spoke of above over they years and as a general rule I do not struggle or fight the assemblies. I occasionally miss on an elevation between two parts but everyone does that and .001" is not going to change that. However, keeping a clean working surface is more important than the machine setup and an ongoing issue that must be addressed for accurate work. Machine setups are generally done once and to a high degree of accuracy here so much so I am not even phased by the stacks of lumber it takes to build a rather large home full of custom passage and entry doors, or even a complete kitchen and the millwork for that home....
so to say I am inaccurate is to say I am incompetent. I am neither.
Joe
your negativity statement is untrue. Unless of course being able to do something you think is impossible to do with rudimentary tools like a stick. The only thing in my writing that you perceive as negative is the fact that you cannot get past your own bias.
I can set knives on a jointer with a stick. As far as a jointer goes I have a complete tutorial written with pics of how to do it with a stick. you can see it right here
You can set them with an expensive gauge. You have some words that are kinda meaningful and do not address the actual efforts it would take to use said gauge . Only that it is more accurate. I challenge this statement, my knives are true to the rotation within 1/2 of .001" using a stick.. Could I get closer? I usually do, but if one is out a half a thousandth I am not beating myself up over it.
So let's go a bit further which of the above is for the guy who has to replace a set knives and does it about 1 /10 the time I do? Would someone else choose on a weekend with no Woodcraft just down the road to buy a One Way and wait another week for it to arrive then try to decipher how to set knives with it? Then add in the fact that the kids need shoes this month for instance? what would you choose?
Additionally, setting knives is never an issue in a planer using the readily available gauge supplied with most planers. furthermore, to my knowledge you have yet to address how a one way is better or more accurate for setting knives in a stationary planer when I cannot even fathom how you can do it.
If a simple solution exists for the everyday person why not address that instead of promoting something that is not viable for most weekend woodworkers.
I will continue critiquing your writing, you really do need an editor. You cannot even acknowledge that metal can and will move given a set of circumstances that are proven and reliable. How can you as a machinist not allow for that and hold your .001" as a baseline for wood is beyond me....
Wood follows the similar rules but when it does the changes are more pronounced. Machines will never be able to account for that and setups can and do change over time... IOW variables abound that you have yet to address other than to say you can get mighty close but it will take a longer? IME there is a point where it works or it does not, I have seen it both ways.
Out of curiousity have you ever tried to fit 10 joints together in a four panel door if they are cut just right one day and on assembly day the moisture content in the glue and air has made that task much harder because you now have to double up clamps to pull the joinery together due to moisture expansion? You also have to factor in that glue has a finite open time and at some point you are going to be tasked with fitting three joints in that time period not once but twice?
How do you account for that? Stop what you are doing and trim every single joint a second time? That is silly when you can simply account for the glue by removing .004" from the joint at the tongue on day one. I work to a relatively common point and .001" is not it, so what if it is .005 or .006 it is still going together without a big hammer and twice as many clamps as you require....
I have done some pretty large production runs with far more complicated assemblies than what I spoke of above over they years and as a general rule I do not struggle or fight the assemblies. I occasionally miss on an elevation between two parts but everyone does that and .001" is not going to change that. However, keeping a clean working surface is more important than the machine setup and an ongoing issue that must be addressed for accurate work. Machine setups are generally done once and to a high degree of accuracy here so much so I am not even phased by the stacks of lumber it takes to build a rather large home full of custom passage and entry doors, or even a complete kitchen and the millwork for that home....
so to say I am inaccurate is to say I am incompetent. I am neither.
Joe
Let us not seek the Republican Answer , or the Democratic answer. Let us not seek to fix the blame for the past. Let us accept our own responsibility for the future John F. Kennedy
![[Image: lurk5.gif]](http://hvac-talk.com/vbb/images/smilies/lurk5.gif)