Oregon Woodworker by Andy Margeson

Are you flat on your back?

2012-02-19T05:14:00.000-08:00

I think of bench chisels as the fundamental woodworking tool, so I have been fascinated by the debate over flattening their backs. The consensus of expert opinion is that you should expend a great deal of time and effort flattening the backs of your chisels a considerable distance back from the edge. Frankly, doing so is extremely tedious and it is even possible to destroy a narrow chisel if you don't pay attention. Trust me, I know. Alternatively, you can buy premium chisels with backs that are already flat, like I did after this embarrassing incident.

Then, lightning struck. Bob Rozaieski and Adam Cherubini suggested that chisels didn't usually have flat backs in the eighteenth century and argued against arduous efforts to flatten the backs of chisels. I am not an expert, but I do know that the back doesn't have to be flat to create a perfectly sharp cutting edge. The accepted wisdom is particularly curious because of the widespread adoption of the "ruler trick" for plane blades: you use a thin metal ruler on your honing surface to create a shallow, narrow bevel on the back of your plane blade to save time and effort. We are admonished never to do this to a chisel.

The argument I've read for not using the ruler trick on chisels is that it would impede paring because you want the chisel back to ride on a reference surface and trim in the same plane. Let's think about that. The ruler I use for the ruler trick is .02" thick and I generally rub the cutting edge on the stone about 2" from it, so, if I remember my trig right, the back bevel angle is about .57 degrees. If you assume I hone a back bevel of 1/16", the cutting edge is raised .0006" above the reference surface when I pare. Yes, it's an issue, but a mighty small one and it can be counteracted by raising the handle slightly. Maybe there's an argument for tedious flattening of backs, but I haven't read a convincing one.

In all other chisel operations I can think of, the back bevel is actually a slight advantage. We all know that, when we chop, the chisel will move away from the bevel because it makes the chisel want to dive and there is no reference surface to prevent it. The back bevel tends to counteract this slightly.

Draw your own conclusion. Mine is to not worry about being flat on my (chisel) back. My premium chisels came flat, so I leave them that way. I use the ruler trick on my second set.

For me, this debate raises a more basic question. Maybe some of the other consensus rules we accept should be reexamined. At the least, it is useful to ask ourselves why from time to time.

Essential power tools

2012-02-15T08:37:00.000-08:00

There is an interesting thread on one of the forums I read about what power tools are essential in a hand tool shop. Of course history proves none are really essential and I can definitely imagine not having any. The lists vary but many of them include a bandsaw, a thickness planer and a drill press. I'd add a cordless drill and call it good.

It's not that you have to have any of these tools. If I someday have space limitations I will do without them, but they are nice to have.

I have begun reducing my power tools. Last year I sold my tablesaw, a major step symbolically and substantively. I won't say that I never miss it, but I am getting along just fine without it. The chopsaw is next. I have a miter box. The tailed jointer gets used very little, isn't necessary and, at 6" wide, is very limiting anyway. However, I use my bandsaw all the time and would really hate to be without it. It would be the last power tool I parted with. I would really like to keep the thickness planer. The drill press is convenient.

I keep looking at the router table. I'd like to get rid of the screaming beast but the step to the hand tool equivalent is a really big one if you are going to replicate its functionality. I purchased a plow plane, a router plane and a shoulder plane and use them regularly, so my use of the router table has declined a lot. The three of them together cost a whole lot more than the router and table. The thing to do next is purchase one hollow and one round.

I don't look forward to sharpening them. Truth be told, the major impediment to adopting hand tools for me is sharpening. Sharpening really is a gateway skill. Chisels, planes, scrapers, spokeshaves, handsaws . . . all demand that the woodworker be able to sharpen. This is very unlike power tools where you use a blade and throw it away or can send it out periodically to be sharpened. I've gotten reasonably good at sharpening straight blades in their many forms, have a good beginning on sharpening handsaws and am turning to curved blades.

Ironically, many hand tool woodworkers rely on power tools for sharpening. There's definitely an argument for them; I bought one and use it periodically, but it's not a silver bullet. I tend to think you should sharpen your hand tools with hand tools, but that's just me.

Get woodworking #4

2012-02-13T07:57:00.000-08:00

With the addition of a few measuring and marking tools and a cordless drill, the focus can turn to projects. Tools and techniques would be acquired as needed to complete the projects. I'd have them start by building a couple of saw benches like the one I built. Very easy and functional. Then, it's time for a Nicholson bench built from construction lumber, like the ones Bob Rozaieski and Mike Siemsen made. Mike told me he will be publishing an article on building a highly simplified one in a day for $100. After that, I'd have the beginner go through Bob Rozaieski's tools and techniques podcasts, starting here. I also like the project series for beginners in Jim Tolpin's The New Traditional Woodworker. You learn techniques while constructing useful tools.

I came to hand tool woodworking from power tool woodworking with a fully equipped workshop, so my introduction was different. I can easily date the exact moment it began: December 14, 2009. That was the date Bob Rozaieski posted his first podcast on the Porringer tea table. This beautiful little table is an ideal hand tool project and really opens your eyes to what is possible with hand tools. Bob's step by step introduction to hand tool techniques is very accessible. For me, making cabriole legs was a turning point. I made a first version from alder I had, then a second and finally a third from claro walnut. I benefited from this project immeasurably.

The main point I have tried to make in my contribution to this discussion is the importance of lowering barriers to entry in time, cost and skill. We need to make it as easy as we possibly can to get started.

Get woodworking #3

2012-02-09T01:50:00.000-08:00

Saws are next. Bob Rozaieski has a good video on handsaws for beginners here which I agree with, but I have a couple of observations.

Bob is all hand tools, and I have learned a lot from him, but I choose to use some power tools and I think most beginners will want to as well. What is the best power saw to recommend to a beginner? I learned from my son, who is a first time homeowner. He had no interest in woodworking growing up and is just now accumulating a few tools. To my surprise, when he needed a saw, he bought a jigsaw. The more I thought about this, the more sense it made to me, particularly for a mostly hand tool woodworker. Like many, I sold my table saw but kept a good bandsaw as I transitioned. A jigsaw serves a similar purpose at much lower cost. Thinking about it as the only power saw for a beginning woodworker, I went out in the shop and tried a few straight rip and crosscuts using my jigsaw and a speed square. It worked pretty well and, with the plane, it could be cleaned up fine. I know this may seem like an odd choice, but, again, I am trying to lower the barriers to entry in time and cost.

One of the advantages of having the jigsaw is that it gives a beginning woodworker an interim solution while they look for and refurbish the set of hand saws Bob is talking about. That takes time. Where I live, hand saws seem to be the one vintage hand tool you can reliably find at low cost. The problem, of course, is sharpening them. When I acquired my handsaws, I was lucky to find a local sharpening service that still had the equipment and knowledge to do a basic job of retoothing and sharpening. It cost me less than $20 per saw. If I hadn't found them, I likely would have sent the saws to Bob. It's a lot easier to take up handsaw sharpening if you start from a good point. Once again, lowering a barrier to entry.

While the beginner is looking for handsaws, the first projects I have in mind can be built with the jigsaw. Or, they can just go to the hardware store and buy a $20 handsaw, which will be nice to have around for cutting plywood.

Get woodworking #2

2012-02-07T13:11:00.000-08:00

After getting the chisel sharp, I would take the beginner through a series of lessons demonstrating various uses of chisels, but I'll skip those here as readers of this blog are familiar with what they would contain.

What's next? So far, I've spent about $90 of the beginner's money and next comes the biggest expenditure I would recommend. A plane is the next tool logically; after all they're just chisels in guides. My opinion is that, if you can afford it, you should own one new premium plane and it should be your first (I'm ignoring wooden planes for the simple reason that I know little about them.). It's what I did by accident and I consider myself lucky. The new plane works right out of the box, important since the beginner doesn't know how a plane should work. A second reason is that I think you need to own one low angle, bevel up plane, one with square sides that is suitable for shooting. Equipped with three or more blades, it has unmatched versatility and simplicity. You'll never outgrow it.

This is a big expenditure, about $300, a major hurdle for a beginner. You can definitely do without it. The other alternative is to have the beginner get an old #5 and refurbish it, which might well be preferable. I'd have them follow Bob Rozaieski's video.

This is a major departure from my friend Bob's recommendations in his podcast series and I definitely respect his opinion. The smoother and extra blades I bought cost more than the seven old planes combined that I own. I have never wanted another new premium bench plane, but I am really glad it was my first plane and I am glad that I have it. If, as their skills increase, they decide they don't want it, it could easily be sold at a good price.

The bad news is, they've spent almost $400; the good news, it gets a lot cheaper the rest of the way. As I look at my tool chest, I can honestly say that there isn't another new premium tool in it that I really need. I have a number and I really like them, but I don't need them. There are good vintage alternatives for all of them. As I've gone along, I have enjoyed finding and refurbishing vintage tools more and more.

Get woodworking #1

2012-02-06T18:16:00.000-08:00

As many of you know, this week we are all supposed to post ideas to help folks get into woodworking. This is a subject I have been thinking about for some time and I have some unorthodox ideas. Being closer to my own starting point than many experts, and having a background in education are advantages, at least in some ways.

As an economist, I am inclined to think that the major barrier to becoming a woodworking hobbyist is high barriers to entry in time, money and skill. Stop and think how much it would cost you in time and/or money and/or skill to replicate your tool collection. Think how much time you have invested in acquiring the many skills involved to use the tools effectively and, if you have taken classes, the cost involved. These barriers to entry are a substantial deterrent, discouraging many who are interested.

So, my contribution to the discussion is thinking about how to lower these barriers to entry, in large part based on my own experience. We need to radically simplify, get down to the minimum things for beginners to learn at first. Remember the 80/20 rule? My suggestion is that it is a mistake to start building things right away. Think about learning golf. Would you just go out and play? I think it is better to get some lessons, in person if possible online if not, and spend a fair amount of time at the driving range and practice green first. The goal should be to minimize the barriers to entry in time, money and skill.

Sharpening is a gateway skill without which you cannot enjoy woodworking and cannot do good work. I personally wasted a great deal of time, money and effort trying to sharpen effectively when I began. Expert discussion is often not helpful because techniques appropriate for experts can be extremely frustrating for beginners and opinion is sharply divided among many alternatives. I think the place to begin is learning how to sharpen a chisel so that it is very sharp. I'd argue that most other sharpening is an extension in some way. The method needs to minimize the time, money and skill required. We want early success.

For obvious reasons, sandpaper on plate glass is the least cost and simplest. Yes, you will graduate but this is the method to begin with. Sharpening a chisel on a piece of sandpaper mounted on plate glass is as inexpensive as it gets. What about a honing guide? Freehand sharpening of chisels is too difficult for beginners. My opinion, and this is controversial, is that the best honing guide is the Kell. It is extremely well made and easier to use than any alternative I am aware of. Here's an expert opinion I respect: Why a Kell guide? Ron Hock speaks highly of it as well. My own experience confirms their opinions. I think a beginner can have better success with this guide than any alternative. Yes, it's expensive but the saving in time, the success you can have without a lot of skill and the money you can save by not pursuing multiple approaches makes it worth it. Compared to powered methods, it's cheap.

Finally, and this will be very controversial, I would not have the beginner flatten the back of the chisel! If it's already flat, great, leave it alone. If not, use the ruler trick. I know this goes against the majority opinion. My reasons are explained very well here: Don't flatten the backs of your chisels. Flattening chisels is too time consuming, too frustrating and too difficult for beginners. You don't need to do it. If you want a flat back, do what I did and buy premium chisels that are already flat, but you don't need to. Otherwise, forget it. I realize many of you will violently object, so I'll save a detailed justification for replies to comments.

Ask yourself this question: Do you know an easier way to get a beginner going with sharpening?

Saw bench

2012-02-03T22:03:00.000-08:00

Here is my version of the saw bench made by Kari Hultman and Dan Klauder that I posted about previously:

I had a large alder sawed up several years ago and every board is streaked like this from minerals in the soil.

It takes almost no time to make this bench and, so far, seems to be a very good design. Ripping down the slot in the middle is very satisfactory. I made this bench just a little bit taller than my old one and it is an improvement. With my upper leg straight and my knee on the board, my other heel is just off the floor, so most of my weight is on the knee. It lets me take a full stroke. A matter of personal preference and yours may differ.

Concerns were expressed about stability, but so far it doesn't seem to be an issue because your leg acts as an outrigger. However, it occurred to me that it would be very easy to slant the bench legs outward without impairing the bench's functionality and you could also make the legs trapezoids if you wanted more lateral stability. Neither of these enhancements would add much to construction complexity.

I have a more traditional saw bench, so I'm going back and forth to compare them.

Roubo book stand

2012-01-31T11:49:00.000-08:00

There have been a number of articles, posts and videos about the Roubo book stand, a clever and attractive piece made by creating a "hinge" in a piece of wood and resawing the board in half so it will open. Roy Underhill did a program on it which motivated me to give it a try. In addition to being a skill builder, my sons are bibliophiles and I think it might make a nice gift.

When I am trying something new and challenging for the first time, I like to take the pressure off of myself by making a crude prototype from secondary wood I have on hand with the explicit intention of throwing it away. I have a large stack of alder which is perfect because it works easily.

You can watch the program, but I want to mention a couple of issues I ran into. After layout, the first thing Roy does is make internal vertical cuts along the sides of the "hinge leaves," which, predictably, he has vintage gizmos for. You drill a small hole in the corners and then use a hack saw blade on which a sharp point has been created and a handle attached to start from this hole and open up the cut. I was able to make the blade by using a pair of tin snips, but I don't have the vintage handle, so I just used the blade. Took a very very long time, perhaps because it was a fine blade and I couldn't exert much downward force. Roy then switched to a small keyhole saw to complete the cut. The keyhole saws I can find around here have very thick blades which would detract a lot from the appearance of the stand. I hit on the idea of using a jig saw blade, which seems to work and is thinner. I am going to make a handle for this jigsaw blade before my next attempt.

Next comes chiseling out the hinge. That went smoothly until I got to the nearly vertical part of the hinge. My bench chisels are too thick to use. Roy uses a very thin paring chisel, which I don't have, so I just cut away the hinge enough to let my bench chisel fit (this is just a prototype). I think a carving chisel might work better than a paring chisel and I am going to look for one. If I understood him correctly, he made these in the past with a bevel rather than rounding the hinge, so this is another alternative. I think it might look better and you might be able to round it over after the stand is opened. Roy points out that you can use a shoulder plane to clean it up once it's opened and this would make things a lot easier. You just have to avoid spelching by putting a slight bevel on the sides of the leaves before you use the shoulder plane.

Anyway, here is the result. I am quite pleased actually, as it accomplished its intended purpose. It's very crude but I learned what I need to know to improve. I think these would look especially nice if you chose a board with a prominent grain pattern that would accentuate the fact that the stand is made from one piece of wood.. Now it's into the burn pile!

Give it a try. I found it a lot of fun.

Update: A friend made me aware of a short video by Chris Schwarz on the Popular Woodworking site that addresses both of the issues I ran into. Coincidentally, I had reached the conclusion that the methods he demonstrates are the way to go. Here it is.

Moxon Vise Completed

2012-01-27T20:38:00.000-08:00

My vise is quite similar to others you have seen, with one exception on the back. Construction notes follow.

I had intended to chisel out hexagons in 1"x3"x3" pieces of wood to receive the nuts and keep them from turning but, when I was test fitting the screws, I found it very convenient to be able to spin the nuts in order to open the vise quickly, The flats on these nuts are so large that I realized I could keep them from turning just by fastening a thin strip underneath them. That way, as soon as the screw is loosened enough to let them clear the strip, I can spin the nuts. It works great. A very simple solution.

I was concerned that I wouldn't be able to get enough torque on the screws, but that's not the case at all. The vise tightens easily.

Note that you don't want the screws to fit the holes tightly in the horizontal dimension. You want to be able to skew the vise slightly in order to make it convenient to use. When you are working on a number of pieces of the same thickness, you leave one screw set and use the other one to insert and remove workpieces. This works very well and is fast. I accomplished this with a coarse half-round file. Mine skews about 1", which seems about right.

This vise far exceeds my expectations and, at a cost of less than $40, is a real bargain. I urge you to make one for yourself, whatever option you choose for the screws. In addition to the one I chose, here are some other options:

Moxon vise screws

2012-01-25T09:58:00.000-08:00

Since I have chosen not to have a vise on my bench, at least for now, having a good portable Moxon vise available is quite important. I have been stymied for some time by the screws. Wooden screws are the best but I don't have a lathe, a threadbox, or a tap and the cost of commercially available screws is prohibitive. In a recent issue of ShopNotes (Vol. 20, Issue 120), the cover story was a project to build an etau, a historical vise from France. The screw was an acme rod and nut obtained from McMaster-Carr with a shop-made wooden hub and handle. It seemed like a great idea and I decided to try it in modified form.

I obtained two 12" long, 1", 5 tpi threaded acme rods and nuts from McMaster-Carr for $32. There are many different sizes and tpi available. I made hexagonal wooden handles 4" long and drilled a hole 2" deep in each to receive the rods. I then epoxied the rods in place and drilled through the handle and rod for a machine screw for extra strength. I read on a boat building forum that if you warm the wood and epoxy to 100 degrees, the epoxy will penetrate deeply into the wood, so that's what I did. In this way, the epoxy strengthens the wood as well as forming a bond between the handle and the screw. I also painted the end grain with epoxy.

The result is shown below. I am extremely pleased with the result. Definitely a good value if it holds up, which I expect.

By the way, if you have forgotten your high school geometry like I have, hexagons are easy to lay out. Draw a circle equal to the outside diameter you want and then use the compass to step off segments of the circle (the radius and the length of the sides are the same). Draw straight lines between adjacent points and you will have a hexagon. Hexagons are relatively easy to make with hand tools. I used a saw and a plane.

The entire project took a couple of hours or so. I'll post about the completed vise shortly.

More on crochets (sideboard hooks)

2012-01-20T18:40:00.000-08:00

Dean makes some very good points in commenting on my earlier post and Bob Rozaieski agrees. What they say about the function of the crochet makes sense to me. The crochet allows you to edge plane without setting holdfasts and is therefore somewhat quicker. For wide workpieces where the holdfasts at the bottom might be insufficient, the crochet holds it securely at the top. Of course, Dean's vise has these characteristics as well and that was Nicholson's plan to begin with.

The crochet I made is definitely not shaped correctly. If you go into Google Images and search for "Roubo workbenches" you will see numerous examples of better ones with longer, shallower tapers that will clearly hold the workpiece more securely. Curiously, if you look at Roubo's plate here, for example, you'll see that his doesn't have a shallow taper.

Update: I have to admit that Dean, Bob and Adam are right. I made a "sideboard hook" that matches the look of the Nicholson bench to my eye. It's also somewhat wider than I usually see as I want to accommodate 8/4 material. As I've written, I enjoy experimentation. I'll likely make at least one more. Although the angle is only 45 degrees it seems to work fine and, in any case, is more angled than Roubo's. I continue to puzzle over why his is shaped the way it is. I can only surmise that he thinks this is enough of an angle to hold the piece against the bench, and maybe it is. Also shown in the picture below is my bench dog. :)

Crochet

2012-01-20T15:33:00.000-08:00

I spent a fair amount of time shaping a crochet in walnut that looks like ones I have seen, more or less resembling the profile of a human hand. Held it up to the bench and decided I didn't like it aesthetically or functionally, so decided to start over.

As I thought about it, the crochet is nothing more than the vertical analogy of the planing stop. On the Nicholson bench, that is simply a square block of wood. It doesn't hold the workpiece down to the bench; gravity does that. When you plane the edge of a piece held vertically against the sideboard, holdfasts hold it up and against the sideboard. As far as I can see, all that is needed from the crochet is to function as a planing stop, nothing more. If you make it wrap around the workpiece, it sticks out too much for my taste, limits the thickness of the piece you can hold and doesn't seem to serve any purpose. Anybody know why crochets are the way they are?

I spent a few minutes creating a basic planing stop as an experiment, bolting it to the bench in case I end up not liking it and want to remove it. I think it fits the look of a Nicholson bench very well and functions perfectly. The picture below shows my first effort and what I ended up with. It works great. It obviously doesn't need to be 2" thick and I may make a thinner version 2.

Once you edge plain on the front of a Nicholson bench you'll wonder how you ever did without it. It's a horizontal workbench. Tremendous.

Work holding

2012-01-17T14:29:00.000-08:00

When I built my bench, I deliberately chose to defer workholding decisions to a phase II. I was so impressed by Bob Rozaieski's podcast on this subject that I began to question whether I wanted a vise on my bench at all, especially since I consider a Moxon vise to be an absolute necessity. The remainder of his workholding accessories are easy to add later.

Today, I began a series of experiments to see what I like best. This is part of the fun for me and I don't care that most of my ideas don't pan out, as long as they are reversible. The side planing stop is easy: a board that fits in the split top and protrudes above the bench top. Bob made a nice one that is flush to the bench top when turned one direction and protrudes above the bench top when turned over. For now, I decided I want to make the board just under one-half inch taller than the top and remove it when I am not using it. I like the split open when I work and, with no shelf below it, I don't care about, even prefer, shavings falling through.

The planing stop is another matter. I just can't bring myself, yet anyway, to cut a big square hole in the top of my bench for the traditional planing stop like Bob made. So I decided to try an invention. Here it is:

The finger on the bottom of the planing stop extends below the transverse bearer on the end and rests against the top stretcher on the legs, as you can see from the last picture. I've tried it a bit and it seems very secure.

I'm going to use it this way for a while and see what I think. If I do decide to install a vise, it will either be a leg vise or a twin screw vise on this end of the bench, which you probably guessed from the last picture.

I'm now at work on the crochet.

Pie Safe

2012-01-13T08:23:00.000-08:00

I recently completed this pie safe (cabinets for storing baked goods with tin panels that have small holes in a design so as to allow air movement while protecting the contents from insects). They originated with Pennsylvania Germans in the nineteenth century. Mine is based on plans and videos from Charles Neil here. It's a highly functional project that we will enjoy for many years.

This project has special significance for me as a woodworker. A pie safe almost begs to be made with a table saw and a mortising machine. Midway through the project, I sold my table saw. I finished making it with hand tools. Selling your table saw is a tipping point, important in itself and highly symbolic. Coincident with this, I rearranged my shop to put the remaining power tools on the periphery and built a hand tool work bench. A fundamental change.

Finding vintage hand tools

2012-01-09T13:04:00.000-08:00

A recent comment expressed frustration about finding restorable hand tools at reasonable prices in the Portland, Oregon area. I am afraid I don't have any magic answers, but I have some suggestions and I particularly hope others will chime in.

Although I live 250 miles away, I have tried to find hand tools in the Portland area and have come away empty-handed. My own theory is that urban areas that experienced much of their development late in the hand tool era and that got electricity early aren't ideal places to look. Add to that the fact that, in the current economic climate, people are trying to make a living by buying vintage items at garage sales and on Craigslist in order to sell them for a profit on E-bay and it's very tough.

Here are some strategies I follow. Don't make a special effort to go to garage sales, particularly if they advertise vintage tools. I was literally stepped on by dealers when I did. If I am going somewhere and pass a garage sale that looks promising, I stop. Good signs are an older home with a large garage or a barn. I occasionally find good items this way without a lot of effort, chiefly planes, handsaws and bits/braces. Same general idea with Craigslist. If you see an interesting item, call and, if its still available, is reasonably priced and nearby, go take a look. Don't make a big effort.

A better approach for me is identifying junk/antique shops that have hand tools. I just stop in when I am driving by and sometimes find good tools this way. To me, the higher price is justified as long as it is still reasonable. I have had some great luck doing this when I travel on vacation, particularly in rural parts of Oregon. If you pass one, stop in and take a quick look. Takes five minutes and they'll usually deal.

Something I would definitely do if I were you is attend one of the sales at the Pacific NW Tools Collectors Association. Information here: PNWTC. I've never been, but hear good things.

A good place to buy vintage tools is on the sale/swap pages of the major forums, such as Woodnet and Sawmill Creek. There tends to be a much higher level of honesty and knowledge by sellers because it is a community. Many of the sellers are well known and have excellent reputations. I would buy from them without hesitation and the higher price is justified in my opinion.

I don't do Ebay and never will, but that's me. Some people have success.

Finally, don't underestimate what is restorable. You'd be surprised what a vinegar bath will do.

Anybody have other ideas to help him and others?

The great hand tool debate

2012-01-03T19:19:00.000-08:00

I have been struck recently by what seems to be a reaction by a number of prominent hand tool woodworkers against buying and using more, ever-more-expensive hand tools. There are two main parts of the debate: how many tools you own and whether you buy new premium tools or inexpensive vintage tools and restore them. Although I find many of the views extreme, they are a useful reminder. It's easy to fall into the trap of believing that becoming a better woodworker depends primarily on the tools you use when the truth is that skill development is the key. I have repeatedly witnessed great woodworkers doing excellent work with poor tools, but great tools aren't enough to enable great work.

I'm somewhere in the middle. I made a tool chest that is about 2'x2'x3' last year and intend that it hold essentially all of my hand tools, excluding things like my Millers Falls Acme miter box, etc. I am selling some tools and buying others, continually refining what I have within the constraint that I want them to fit. I find that I really like working from the chest and I like the discipline of limiting myself in this way. Chris Schwarz espouses a similar view in The Anarchist's Tool Chest.

As for buying new premium tools vs. restoring vintage tools, I do both. Where I live, it is relatively easy to buy vintage saws and bench planes and that's primarily what I do. I enjoy owning and using these vintage tools even though I know I could buy new ones that are arguably somewhat better. On the other hand, it is virtually impossible to buy vintage specialty planes at reasonable prices, so I have purchased new ones that are simply outstanding. Look in my chest and you will see Stanley Bailey bench planes sitting alongside Lee Valley shoulder, router and plow planes.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with owning a huge collection of hand tools, there is nothing wrong with limiting yourself to vintage tools and there is nothing wrong with exclusively purchasing new tools. Everyone should feel comfortable doing as they please. Just remember that, in the end, skill is what matters. Skill comes from practice and that only happens when the tool is in your hand.

On mistakes

2011-12-30T17:37:00.000-08:00

Finishing up my latest project, a pie safe, I made a relatively small mistake and it reminded me of something. Earlier this year, an officer of our local woodworking guild was asked to define the difference between a beginner and an intermediate woodworker. He paused thoughtfully and then replied, "An intermediate woodworker can fix his or her mistakes without starting over with a fresh piece of wood." I found that answer interesting and provocative; in fact, I've thought quite a lot about it. I have put a lot of emphasis on making fewer and fewer mistakes, with some success and at the cost of slowing down my work considerably. Slowing down is not necessarily bad, but the fact remains that most of us will make some mistakes or encounter some unanticipated problem during the course of a project. Learning how to fix mistakes and problems is an essential skill and one I have enjoyed learning about this year.

I have read in various places that, if you disassemble a fine old piece, you will often find evidence of mistakes that were fixed by the craftsman in skilled and artful ways.

The Mechanic's Companion

2011-12-28T09:59:00.000-08:00

It's interesting to browse through Nicholson's book, which is available on Google Books here One of the surprising things about it is the extensive section on geometry. It is quite sophisticated and technical. Even if a joiner didn't have a formal understanding of geometry, having the ability to make use of geometrical concepts could be extremely useful. If you scan the last part of the geometry section, you'll see what I mean. I am wondering how common it was in the early nineteenth century for woodworkers to have this skill. Anybody know?

Who was Peter Nicholson?

2011-12-22T08:07:00.000-08:00

Reading about the design of what we call the Nicholson work bench made me curious. The best biography I could find of Peter Nicholson is on Wikipedia here. Turns out he was an extremely interesting man, self-taught and accomplished in architecture, mathematics and engineering. As a youth, he served an apprenticeship to a cabinet-maker and worked as a journeyman before abandoning the trade in favor of teaching and writing. The list of his publications is lengthy. A common theme is the application of science and mathematics to practical problems of construction and design.

In my opinion, the Nicholson workbench is a timeless classic, simple and elegant but based on a sophisticated understanding of effective and efficient design. Almost every element serves multiple purposes. It has a high strength to weight ratio and can be made very long. It was put forward by a man uniquely qualified to appreciate its excellence. One of the things I like about my bench is that it springs from this history. It is timeless.

Nicholson saw bench?

2011-12-19T18:59:00.000-08:00

I mentioned in a previous post that I wanted to have a pair of saw benches. I find that it would be nice to have a second saw bench when I am sawing longer stock and I would also like them to do double duty as the base for a temporary low assembly table. Today I did an internet search for saw benches and came upon the following at Kari Hultman's The Village Carpenter blog (used with permission):

Her post about it is here. Kari had done the same thing I did this morning:

"I searched the internet this morning for saw bench plans and settled on one built by Dan Klauder, who found inspiration in Alex Bealer's Old Ways of Working Wood."

I did a double take. Does this bear an uncanny resemblance to my bench or what? It has the same major elements as a Nicholson workbench. Not surprisingly, I really like this design and a pair will serve my purposes very well. In addition to being a simple, easy to construct design, I think it has a number of advantages over the saw-horse-like one I have now.

So, to Alex Bealer, Dan Klauder and Kari Hultman, thank you. Check out the book and the blogs.

A new holiday tradition

2011-12-18T12:08:00.000-08:00

Our son is home for the holiday from law school. He's a cool cat (I'm dating myself) so I was pleasantly surprised when he agreed to my proposal that we cut five minute dovetails together each morning. For those of you who don't remember, Gary Rogolski, from Oregon, wrote an article in Fine Woodworking some years ago suggesting cutting a dovetail as a warm-up or training exercise on a daily basis. Here's a video. You make a single joint with a single tail quickly and without fussing, primarily by eye.

It's a great idea and has been a lot of fun for both of us. There is no pressure because the joint is going in the burn bin regardless of the outcome. We take our morning coffee out to the shop and, twenty minutes later, both of us are done (We take turns with the tools). Working this way, rather than the painstakingly slow approach I take with dovetails on an actual project, is very instructive. As a plus, it's a very nice shared experience that means a lot to me.

Try it for a week, if you can with a son, daughter, father or mother.

Happy holidays.

Becoming a hand tool woodworker

2011-12-15T21:45:00.000-08:00

I can remember, almost to the day, when I became a hand tool woodworker, novice division. It was two years ago now that I watched the first episode of Bob Rozaieski's podcast series on building a Porringer tea table. Designed for beginners, it taught in a step by step, clear way how to make cabriole legs with hand tools. I remember thinking, "I don't know if I could ever do something like that, but I want to try." I had some 12/4 alder, so the risk was small. It went so well that I made another, then a third from claro walnut.

As I went along, I began accumulating and using hand tools, some new, some restored and made a tool chest to house them. Increasingly, my power-tool-centered workshop didn't work. It was cramped, the layout was wrong and the benches were wrong, just not designed for hand tool work. This fall, I went on a tear, selling my tablesaw, my bench and an assembly table as well as numerous tools I wasn't using. I made the Nicholson bench and repurposed an antique butcher block that belonged to my wife's parents as a joinery bench. Next up is a second saw bench that, along with its mate and a piece of plywood, can double as a low assembly table. This is where things stand:

I cannot tell you what a difference this represents. Of course, you can't see the power tools around the periphery, but that's the point. They are on the periphery. The transformation may never be complete but a tipping point has been passed.

Finish for workbenches

2011-12-15T18:08:00.000-08:00

There are a number of opinions regarding the appropriate finish to put on workbenches. The main alternatives recommended seem to be:

No finish
Watco Danish Oil
boiled linseed oil
wax
A mixture of turpentine, beeswax and boiled linseed oil
Waterlox
a mixture of spar varnish, mineral spirits and boiled linseed oil.

I chose 7, in part because I had the ingredients on hand and in part because I thought it would provide the best protection for the bench. This is what Lie Nielsen uses on their benches. My main concern was that it would make the surface slippery and interfere with workholding. I avoided polyurethane varnish for that reason. I applied one thick coat and am happy to report that it worked well. With my eyes closed, I cannot tell the difference between a bare surface and a surface that this mixture has been applied to. It is not slippery. I will not be waxing it.

As you can tell from the picture below, the finish produced an amber tint on the douglas fir and really brought out the color differences that were present in the wood. The picture was taken right after the finish was applied and the sheen has since disappeared.

I'm happy with the choice so far. We'll see how it holds up.

Done

2011-12-13T17:26:00.000-08:00

Observation #4

2011-12-13T05:55:00.000-08:00

It is very important to make sure the tops of the sideboards are coplanar as soon as they are attached to the leg assemblies and prior to the installation of the bearers. Maybe this is obvious, but I was very fortunate to pay close attention to it, as detailed previously. I introduced about 1/8" of wind during assembly. I was . . . displeased. The great thing about the Nicholson design and handtools is you can fix it. I used my jointer to carefully bring them back into planarity. Then, when I installed the bearers, I planed them flat to the sideboards. The payoff for me was this: When I installed the top boards, they were dead flat. To my amazement, I am done, ready for finish. No flattening of the top boards is required!

What was my mistake? I planed the sideboards perfectly even with each other. However, during assembly I noticed a defect and flipped one of them end for end so the other side would be out. The sideboards were 1/16th narrower on one end so this introduced 1/8" of wind. A foolish mistake, but one I could recover from.

Here is a picture from the bottom. I glued the sideboard to the top board on each edge and then used screws with washers to attach the top boards to the cleats. The washers make it easy for the top to slide back and forth in the elongated holes as the moisture content changes seasonally. This will always be my favorite photo of the bench because it really shows how smart the Nicholson bench design is. Siimple, straightforward, highly functional, it hides its sophistication.

Observation #3

2011-12-12T04:45:00.000-08:00

A version of this bench could be built at low cost by a beginning woodworker with a very basic set of tools in a weekend or two. Mike Siemsen and Bob Rozaieski have really shown the way here. This is important because the initial learning curve is very steep and you really need a nice bench. Think about what it would have meant if you had had a bench like this when you were starting out. If you did, I think you were prescient. I wasn't.

Of course, you can easily make a more challenging version of the bench. If I had it to do over again, I think I would use the dovetail joinery for the stretchers and notches in the front aprons from the original. Just a nice historical connection.

Observation #2

2011-12-11T06:20:00.001-08:00

Make your bench out of good quality, relatively dry construction lumber, reclaimed lumber or a softer hardwood. If you can, make the top a full 2" thick. There is certainly nothing wrong with using construction lumber for the top but the 2" gives you assurance that your holdfasts will hold without blocks and has numerous other advantages. In our area, there are many suitable choices available for $3.50 per bf or less. I paid $3. There are 32 bf in the top, so that's $96. The total cost of all materials would still be less than $200 for the most important woodworking appliance you have. If you can't go this way, just use construction lumber and add bearers.

Finding suitable material was the hardest part of building this bench for me. Dry construction lumber just isn't available here in the midst of douglas fir forests. The best looking construction lumber I saw was #1 & btr 6x6s. They seem to be generally available in higher grades, likely to meet structural specifications. I thought very seriously about buying some and resawing them. I am lucky that I have a bandsaw that will do it, but you could use a circular saw, cutting on both sides and finishing with a handsaw. You'd have to wait awhile for it to dry before constructing the bench, over a summer here. Reclaimed lumber would be a great option and that was my first choice. Unfortunately, it is so popular here that it costs more than new lumber. I feel very fortunate that I found a small custom mill with a kiln and I decided to spend the extra money to use premium lumber, but it wasn't necessary. Had I not done this, I probably would have made the base out of construction lumber and purchased two softer hardwood planks for the top.

There is no reason not to build this bench entirely from 2x6s if that is what you find.

I used 120 bf . You could use less but, given the price of construction lumber, why not add mass and rigidity?

Bottom line: You just have to see what's available at a price you can afford, just as a 19th century craftsman would have done.

Observations for Nicholson workbenches

2011-12-10T08:34:00.001-08:00

I have kept the June 2007 issue of Popular Woodworking on my assembly table as I built my bench. The cover is the Nicholson bench Chris Schwarz built, but that isn't the reason. It contains his lengthy "10 Solid Rules for a Better Workbench" article, rules which he has repeated several times since in other publications. I think he would look at my bench and say I followed them all except for being clamp friendly and workbench height. I think this bench is clamp friendly; it's just that it emphasizes work holding by other means. As for height, he acknowledges that there is a range. I'm about 2" higher than his "pinky guideline", but, at over 6'2", 34" is as low as I will go.

In this spirit, I have decided to come up with 10 observations that I think may be useful to others considering building a Nicholson workbench. My hope is that you will chime in with comments, criticisms, observations of your own so that readers get a range of views.

So, here's Observation #1: You can design your Nicholson workbench to have as much mass and rigidity as you want. More is usually better, but not always. The most frequent criticism of Nicholson benches is that they lack both and I believe I have shown that it just isn't true. The amount of mass and rigidity your bench has is a design choice for you to make. Particularly if you use construction lumber, adding a 2x6 ledger for the bearers accomplishes several things. It solidly locks the legs vertical, like the shoulder of a huge tenon. With it, there is no need for a bottom stretcher along the length of the bench. It stiffens the side board, effectively turning the bottom half into a 4x6. It's easy, it's cheap, do it. The second best way is to add bearers. It is so easy to do this, I think the minimum number is seven. I'm leaving the top for a separate observation, so the third best way is to beef up the legs. Again, easy to laminate 2x6's. Especially if you are using construction lumber, material cost is not a big issue, so why not?

Mass and rigidity aren't always better. Mike Siemsen wants a bench that he can transport, so a bench over 300 lbs, like mine will be, wouldn't be good. You can always add bearers on either side of the leg so you have places on the bench that are super solid. Does the whole top need to be? Finally, you can build a solid bench raiser if you want.

My point is that this is a choice you get to make, not an inherent characteristic of the Nicholson bench.

Stress reliever

2011-12-08T17:32:00.001-08:00

Once I found wood I liked, my biggest concern about building this bench was whether I would be able to get the top flat without removing too much material. I have never flattened a surface this big and the prospect is somewhat daunting. I want holdfasts to work on the top without gluing in blocks, which proved to be a problem for Bob Rozaieski. Tools for Working Wood says the Gramercy holdfasts will work on surfaces 1 3/4" or thicker. My top boards are just under 2" as sanded by the mill, but not jointed.

So, today, I installed the bearers on each end and laid the boards on the base with my fingers crossed. The boards don't rock! What a relief. For some reason, the boards aren't quite the same thickness but, as best I can tell, I'll need to remove less than 1/16" of material. It looks like most of it will be front to back, which seems more straightforward than trying to take out twist. Reason for optimism anyway.

I confess that I also wanted to see what the bench is going to look like. Here it is:

I'm more than pleased, thrilled really. I have more work to do on the base, so the top boards are back on stickers. Assuming that I can in fact flatten the top successfully, this bench is going to more than meet my expectations going in.

After this, I went back to installing and planing bearers. I have been doing a fair amount of planing the past few days and was tiring. I thought I should stop and sharpen but, on a whim, I applied some paraffin to the base of the plane. I literally almost fell and, for a second, thought I was going to lose the plane off the other side of the base! My old wartime #7 has a corrugated base and I just don't understand how a little paraffin can make this much difference, but it does. I have tried this before without having much impact. Is it something about the fir? How is this possible?

Planar planing

2011-12-07T17:24:00.001-08:00

Whether because of my progressive lenses or inexperience, I was having trouble satisfying myself with winding sticks that the tops of the side boards were in the same plane. So, as a doublecheck, I stretched string tightly across the diagonals and was relieved to find that they intersected in the middle without deflection. The last thing I want to do is remove a lot of material from the top, so I think this is a critical step. Not sure if you can see the string:

As you can see from the shavings, I did have to remove some material to get the side boards in the same plane.

I made the transverse bearers today, but didn't get them installed. I settled on seven:

I did some testing with a dead blow hammer and a block. It seems really solid.

She's on her feet!

2011-12-06T18:45:00.001-08:00

Things went quite smoothly. I glued the bottom two inches of the sideboards and installed screws from the back in elongated holes on the tops. The bottoms of the sideboards will be pegged to the legs.

After the glued dried, I spent time making sure the tops of the sideboards are as co-planar as I can possibly make them. The decision to leave them proud of the legs was a good one for this purpose.

Standing back to look at it, I have two reactions. I like it a lot, and eight feet is long for a bench. I can't even imagine a bench twelve feet long. Next step is to start installing transverse bearers.

Making progress

2011-12-05T18:56:00.001-08:00

The leg assemblies and the sides are done, so it's time to start putting the pieces together. The top stretcher is low for a reason, as I'll explain later.

I mentioned that I made a bench raiser prototype. I made it from an old 4x4 and some scrap pieces of 2x4 in less than two hours. It turned out surprisingly well and I haven't felt the need to make another version. If I did, I wouldn't go crazy making dog holes though. The idea was to use my Lee Valley Wonder Pup set conveniently. Definite overkill, although they don't seem to hurt anything. My Moxon vise will be separate.

Bob Rozaieski's planing stop

2011-12-05T06:16:00.001-08:00

Bob reviewed his first year experience with his Nicholson bench in a podcast. In it he talks about a planing stop he built for the center opening in the top that is really neat. It's just a board with notches on one side that fit over the transverse bearers and sits level with the top of the bench. When he turns it over, the board sits on top of the bearers and extends above the bench surface so it can be used as a planing stop. It's a simple but highly functional idea that I'll definitely be incorporating in my bench.

This podcast is interesting in its entirety, so check it out. In addition to confirming that I wanted a Nicholson bench, it convinced me that you can make most of the bench out of construction lumber but the top needs to be a full 2" thick. Christopher Schwarz came to the same conclusion. Yes, you could put in a lot of transverse bearers and get by, but you want your holdfasts to hold anywhere you place the holes for them.

The Moxon vise

2011-12-03T16:47:00.001-08:00

Nicholson's book followed by a century a famous and influential work by Joeseph Moxon, entitled Mechanick Exercises: Or The Doctrine of Handy-Works (available on Google Books). One passage is particularly noteworthy regarding the illustration of a workbench:

Sometimes a double Screw is fixed to the side of the Bench, as at g; or sometimes its farther cheek is laid an edge upon the flat of the Bench, and fastened with an Hold-fast, or, sometimes, two on the Bench.

Christopher Schwarz reintroduced us to the latter alternative, the Moxon twin screw vise as it is now known. Here is a link to a post on his blog at Popular Woodworking and here is one to the Sketchup model. This vise has become very popular and appears to be on its way to widespread adoption. I made a crude prototype and quickly decided I would never be without one. It is because I like this vise so much that I am not putting a vise on my bench.

Making your twin screw vise portable has numerous advantages. The experts want you to make your bench low, primarily for planing. Like many, I resisted this advice and finally settled on 34," too high by their standards and too low by mine. This really came home to me when I saw a picture of Christopher Schwarz, a tall fellow, dovetailing at his bench. He looked like a giraffe talking to a child in a cartoon. He was bent way forward at the waist and way back at the neck. It is no wonder that he embraced the Moxon vise. Having the vise sit on top of the bench means the work is raised up considerably to a much more comfortable position, yet still held securely.

Another advantage is its portability. I needed to do something for a friend recently at his house. I took my prototype Moxon vise and my sawbench with me and used the vise on top of the sawbench. It worked great. I have seen pictures of it being used on a picnic table.

The rub is figuring out how to make or buy the screws. There is a manual threader available but it is generally known to be of highly uneven quality. Beall makes a threader kit that is somewhat more expensive and uses a router. Both of these options require high quality dowels, which are hard to come by in large sizes (1 1/4 or 1 1/2"), though Beall does sell dowels on its website, or you can make your own. An interesting alternative recently came to my attention. The December 2011 edition of ShopNotes has a project for a different kind of benchtop vise. They do a nice job of making a screw from acme threaded rod and a shopmade wooden hub, which doesn't require a lathe for construction and is very rugged. You could make two of these for a twin screw vise.

Finally, a variant of the twin screw vise is to make it as part of a small "bench on bench" for joinery, an idea that is also gaining popularity. I made a crude prototype of this too and really like it.

The Moxon vise lets me lower my bench height and feel comfortable not having a vise on my bench. I am reassured by Bob Rozaieski comments below that my direction is viable.

Update: See the comments for several approaches using steel screws. McMaster-Carr is a good source for acme threaded rod. For example, 1"-5 tpi rod 12" long can be had for as little as $11.50 apiece. See this page. If you prefer wooden threads, many major suppliers carry the manual threader kit. This is the link for the router-based threading kit, which is also carried by Lee Valley.

Here is a link to Derek Cohen's version, with an I beam for dovetailing that he devised.

A boring experience

2011-12-01T18:48:00.001-08:00

I hadn't realized that my bench will have 72 holes for holdfasts or bench dogs. That's a lot of holes to bore with a brace and bit. However, the 60 in the sides and legs are done. My Goodell Pratt brace worked very smoothly and I was eventually boring quite quickly and accurately. I wanted to get all the holes in before starting assembly in order to make sure the transverse bearers don't conflict and I think it is easier to bore accurate holes vertically.

The sides and legs, except for installing the stretchers in the mortises, are done. I'm gluing the 2x6 ledgers to the sides before I attach the legs to the sides so I can butt the legs up very tight to them. These ledgers really beef up the sides, provide a stable base for the transverse bearers and help to stabilize the legs. Soon she'll be on her feet.

Postscript: After finishing, I decided I wanted to sharpen the bit before boring the holes in the top and I don't have an auger bit file. None of the suppliers I checked had them. Tools for Working Wood told me that the manufacturer has discontinued them. Lee Valley's site says, "This product is no longer available." I finally found one at Lie Nielsen. Hopefully, this is temporary but it doesn't augur well. :) You may want to get one while you can.

Fort Vancouver bench

2011-11-30T18:40:00.001-08:00

Patrick Neal forwarded some detailed pictures of the bench at Fort Vancouver, which was apparently constructed to Nicholson's original specifications. Here they are:

Patrick says "[t]he bench is 32" high, the top is 30 x 104.5, thelegs are true 4 x 4, the stretchers are also 4 x 4, and the skirt and topsupport boards are nearly a true 2 x 6. He says the vise needs a guide, demonstrating the wisdom of what MikeSiemsen has done (see below).

Jamie Bacon's Bench

2011-11-29T20:12:00.001-08:00

Here is a picture of Jamie Bacon's bench (used bypermission). Read about it on hisblog: Plane Shavings. Notice that he put notches on the legs intothe side board, as in the original engraving. Jamie told me that he reallylikes his front vise "but if I had it to do over, I’d have just made aportable one like the Moxon that everybody’s gone nuts about this pastyear." I really like the clean lookof not having a front stretcher or shelf, although Jamie has since added ashelf to his.

Southern yellow pine is a nice wood for this bench. Wish we could get it here.

Fort Vancouver National Historic Site Carpenter's Shop

2011-11-28T21:50:00.000-08:00

Patrick Neal comments below that he volunteers at the Fort Vancouver National Historic Site Carpenters' Shop where there are two Nicholson benches built from Nicholson's instructions. I spent some time tonight searching for photos and found the following panorama, which is copyrighted so I'll just link to it here. Carpenter's Shop Panorama Read about the photographer here: Don Bain. The picture is quite unusual in that you can click on it with your mouse and look around the shop.

Notice that the benches only have the front sideboard, which is authentic. However, notice the vise on the bench to the left against the wall. Do you see what's on the guide? Looks to me that it functions like a horizontal leg vise with holes and a peg in the guide. Is it the functional equivalent of a twin screw vise?

I'm definitely going to go for a visit soon, take some detailed pictures to post here and try to learn more about their historical research. Thank you Patrick.

Mass and rigidity

2011-11-28T20:13:00.001-08:00

Nicholson benches are sometimes criticized as lacking mass and rigidity because the top is relatively thin. One of Christopher Schwarz's rule is to always add mass. My bench will contain roughly 111 board feet of lumber and will be 8 feet long by 2 feet wide. Assuming a Roubo with the same surface area, a 5 inch thick top, the same size legs and 2 inch by 6 inch stretchers around the bottom, it would contain roughly 122 board feet of material. To make things almost equal, assume I put a transverse bearer every foot across the Nicholson bench, bringing the total up to 117 board feet.

These benches have roughly the same mass and the same work area. Which is more rigid? Not being a structural engineer, I don't know the answer, though I want to explore the question at some point if I can. Intuitively, there is actually more structure in the top of the Nicholson and the side boards take advantage of the properties of wood to resist stretching and compression along the grain. Torsion boxes are known for their rigidity. I can tell you for sure that a 2 inch thick fir board supported on 1 foot centers is pretty solid. Of course, so is a 5 inch thick plank supported on 6 foot centers. Any engineers care to comment?

Until proven otherwise, I think both of these benches have more than adequate rigidity. That's probably why both traditions came about. Different ways of skinning the cat. My point here is that there is no reason that a Nicholson bench need have less mass or less rigidity than the alternatives. That's a design choice.

Mike Siemsen's bench

2011-11-27T09:20:00.001-08:00

Mike Siemsen has a woodworking school north of Minneapolisand a website. Three years ago, he beganposting about his construction of a Nicholson bench on his blog (Mike's blog). This is how he characterizes hisrequirements:

I needed a bench that was portable and fit in my van to taketo demonstrations. I wanted it to be an inexpensive example of a workbench forpeople getting into woodworking without a large outlay of cash. I wanted abench that could be easily switched from right handed to left handed use. Iwanted to build my own wooden vises. It needed to be stout.

He spends about $100 on his benches using constructionmaterials and, as you can see, ends up with a very nice bench. I learned a lot from reading his blogposts. One thing of particular interestto me is the way he constructed his vise, which is quite similar to the one inthe original engraving. He made an assembly consisting of a tubefor the guide to run in and also to hold the screw securely (picture here). There has been criticism of the original vise andthis seems like it would take care of it. I emailed Mike about this and his opinion is that all vises rack and youneed to use a spacer block. Beforedeciding not to include a vise, I had been musing about modifying theoriginal vise to operate like a leg vise installed horizontally, with holes and a pin in theguide. I think Mike's solution issuperior.

Here's a picture of the completed bench from this page of his blog.

Mike also shared the news that he is hoping to post an article around Christmas time about a"simplified" version of the bench. It took him 9 hours and cost $110 to build, including a steelscrew for the vise that he bought on sale at Lee Valley! Even though I chose to spend more money so Iwouldn't have to use construction lumber, I really admire his approach. As Mike says, "These benches are verysimple and we tend to over think things."

You can make a Nicholson bench as fancy and expensive as youwant, but it is good to remember how simple and economical they can be.

Update: Someone asked Mike about the traditional vise on his bench and he gave a thoughtful reply on his blog. Read it here.

Bob Rozaieski's bench

2011-11-26T08:42:00.001-08:00

As many of you know, Bob has a popular website called Logan Cabinet Shoppe . A year and a half ago, Bob began a series of podcasts in which he constructs a Nicholson bench using handtools without using an existing bench. This series is really interesting and a must view for anyone considering building one of these benches. I just want to focus here on one episode that has mostly to do with design and use, Episode 23, Workbench Work Holding.

One of the most important attributes of a workbench designed for hand tools is workholding. Others are mass and rigidity, which I'll discuss separately. When you use stationary machines, you take the piece to the machine. When you use hand tools you take the tool to the piece, usually on a bench. It is crucial that the piece be held firmly and in a way that allows the operation to be performed conveniently and effectively. Ideally, you'd position the piece on the bench just the way you want to work on it, snap your finger and it would be instantly locked into place.

A popular way is to do this with vises, which have attained limitless variety and an almost unimaginable degree of quality and sophistication. For example, Benchcrafted sells a "Roubo Benchmaker's Package" consisting primarily of exquisite vise hardware for $750! A more traditional alternative is Lake Erie Toolworks, which sells a fantastic premium wooden screw kit to make a twin screw vise for $365 or you can buy one screw for other alternatives like leg vises. Lee Valley and Lie Nielsen both make hardware for twin screw vises. These are amazing products. Of course, there are more economical alternatives as well.

For Bob, simpler is better. His bench has a basic twin wooden screw vise attached to the side board that is often not even on the bench. That's it. All other work holding is accomplished in other ways. Episode 23 is a demonstration of those ways. For me, it was an eye opener and fundamentally changed my way of thinking. Watch it to see a minimalist, highly effective traditionalist alternative. It comes down to having a system of stops that oppose the force you are applying. What Nicholson calls a bench hook and we call a planing stop holds a piece from moving side to side (the x axis). The split top accepts a stop that runs the length of the bench in the middle and holds a piece from moving front to back (the y axis). Holdfasts hold the piece from moving up and down (the z axis). It's that simple.

Similar thinking applies to pieces held vertically on the front side board. The board is held up by dogs or holdfasts. It is held to the sideboard with a "crochet," a piece of wood shaped like a finger holding the end of the board, and holdfasts. That's it.

The vise still has a place, most notably to hold pieces vertically for dovetailing, sawing tenons, etc.

You either like this or you don't and there is a not a right answer. I am as impressed as most by the benches with these beautiful vises. But, this simple approach appeals to me for its historical authenticity, its elegance and its economy. As best I could, I experimented with my existing bench and found I really liked it. To me, this episode makes an overwhelming case for a Nicholson bench that employs traditional work holding methods. I have decided to go one step further as an experiment. My bench is not going to have a vise at all, though I did think through how I will add one later if I choose to.

Notice that I didn't say I wouldn't have a vise. I'll post about the Moxon vise, which I will have, separately, but the point is it won't be fixed to the bench. And it might use hardware from one of these companies. I'm not as traditional, or as accomplished, as Bob.

Building begins

2011-11-24T19:37:00.001-08:00

My lumber is S2S 1 15/16" thick so I made my legs 4x6s. Since it's dead flat, this was super simple.

Next, I started working on the side boards. Although it isn't in the Nicholson engraving, a number of modern builders have cut off the corners and I like the look. I wanted to get a nice, clean finish cut, so I adopted the somewhat unorthodox approach of using my big Disston miter box saw. It worked great:

I am trying to be very careful to make sure the top boards rest on a perfectly flat plane (among other things, to minimize the effort of flattening the top) so I took a lot of time matching up the side boards exactly:

Laying out the holes on the side boards

2011-11-23T19:47:00.001-08:00

I have been asked about laying out the holes on the side boards. Assuming that the legs on the bench in the engraving are 10 feet apart on center, each set of holes is 2 feet wide. The vertical row of holes continues down the legs. The actual width of a 2x12 is 11 1/4 inches. If you make the vertical distance between the centers of the top and bottom rows of holes 7 inches, then the center of the holes on the diagonal will be 5 inches apart.

As long as the center of your legs is an even multiple of 2 feet apart, this will work. For an 8 foot bench with legs 6 feet on center there will be 3 sets of holes, for a 6 foot bench with legs 4 feet on center, there will be 2 sets of holes, etc.

7 inches makes the math works out evenly but, if you want other dimensions, just remember the Pythagorean Theorem. Add the square of the horizontal distance and the square of the vertical distance of each set of holes. Then take the square root of that number. That's the length of the diagonal. Divide by 5 to get the distance between holes. In my example, 7 squared plus 24 squared equals 625. The square root of 625 is 25. 25 divided by 5 is 5 inches between the centers of the holes measured along the diagonal. Of course, you can alter the number of holes as well.

If you'd like the vertical distance between the top and bottom row of holes to be 9", then the holes will be 5.126" apart along the diagonal. This is so close to 5 1/8" that I think we can call it good. Just measure from the top or bottom consistently.

Similarly, if you want the vertical distance to be 8", then holes placed at 5 1/16" intervals along the diagonal will be almost even. Just start from the same edge every time. In the end, 8" looked about right to me, so that's what I did.

As for the vertical holes, since there are three of them, the easiest thing to do is use dividers. That's probably how Nicholson would have laid out the holes on the diagonal too. Really no need to use a ruler at all if you want to skip the math.

Wood Movement

2011-11-23T06:02:00.001-08:00

One of the things I have wondered about is that several respected woodworkers have glued the side boards to the legs, a cross grain joint. Because the side boards are so wide, shrinkage is a major issue, particularly here in Oregon where we have hot dry summers and cool wet winters. According to the Woodweb calculator, and assuming the moisture content ranges from 7 to 14%, this could be as much as 5/32". Perhaps extreme, but it convinces me to take shrinkage into account.

I have decided to deal with shrinkage by floating the torsion box on the legs. I will glue and peg the bottom of the side boards to the legs and extend them 1/4" above the top of the legs. The 6" transverse bearers will rest on a 6" ledger glued to the side boards, which will allow the sideboards to expand and contract freely without affecting the top. This ledger also serves as a long stretcher and will keep the bench from racking. As a result, my bench will be like the Nicholson plate in not having a long stretcher across the bottom.

Why I'm not using construction lumber for my bench

2011-11-22T21:37:00.000-08:00

AsNicholson observed, the thicker the better. A criticism sometimes made of the Nicholson bench is that it is springyand light. I think this can be addressedby using full 2" pieces and by stiffening the torsion box. After using his Nicholson bench for a year,Bob Rozaieski said that, if he had it to do over again, he would make the top afull 2" so holdfasts would work without gluing blocks to the underside ofthe top. A good compromise would be tomake the base out of construction lumber and just make the top from full2" higher quality lumber. But, Idecided that I would either use reclaimed lumber, which is often available inmy area, or go to a custom sawmill for all the material. Asit happened, I stumbled onto what I regard as a great option. A custom sawmill in my area had somekiln-dried almost clear vertical grain Douglas Fir that had been rejected formillwork because of stains. I got it forless than $3 per board foot, much more than construction grade lumber but worthit in my opinion. The pieces are deadflat, sanded and a full 2 inches thick. Because they are vertical grain, I hope that the bench top will be verystable. And. ...I like the way it looks.This lumber says Oregon. It'sacclimating in my shop now. Time tosettle on a design.

What Nicholson had to say about the Bench

2011-11-22T05:47:00.001-08:00

Only two pages (87-89) are devoted to the bench in Nicholson's book. There are some interesting tidbits beyond what is apparent from the engraving. These caught my attention.

Nicholson describes a "upright rectangular prismatic pin," visible in the engraving on the left side of the top. Used as a planing stop, he calls it a bench hook. It is essentially a square block held in place by friction that is moved up and down with a mallet to serve as a planing stop. This is for a right-handed woodworker. The bench hook and the screw would be on the right side of the bench for a left-handed woodworker like me.

The bench screw, or vise, has a "guide" on the side opposite the screw itself. It is mortised through the side board and serves to align the top of the check with the top of the bench. This vise is subject to racking unless a spacer is placed between the check and sideboard on the opposite side of the screw from the piece being held. Some modern variations of the bench use a twin screw vise instead of the guide.

The recommended dimensions of bench components fits reasonably well with standard dimensions of modern construction lumber. The legs are to be at least three and a half inches square and the top is to be one and a half to two inches thick, "the thicker, the better for the work." The latter is the major issue that arises in using construction lumber for the bench.

The pairs of legs are "generally coupled together by two rails dovetailed into the legs." The engraving looks like a mortise. There are three or four transverse bearers between the legs.

" For the convenience of putting things out of the way, the rails at the ends are covered with boards." He goes on to describe a locker that is sometimes created for tool storage, accessible by sliding a portion of the top open. I don't see this in the engraving.

The Nicholson Bench

2011-11-21T18:39:00.001-08:00

I decided to create this blog to document my construction of a Nicholson woodworking bench from the English woodworking tradition. It appears in an early 19th century book called The Mechanic's Companion by Peter Nicholson. (available online at Google Books). The bench is shown in an engraving (Plate XII):

This workbench definitely doesn't look like what we expect. Its distinguishing feature is the wide (approximately 12") "side board." It is used to hold boards horizontally for operations such as edge planing. One end of the board is held in the vise and it is held up by dogs or holdfasts placed in the holes at an appropriate height. The side board also functions as a large rear "check" for the "bench screw."

The side board serves a structural purpose as well. The top of the bench is relatively thin, about 2". The side board makes up for this, transferring the force of planing, chopping etc. anywhere on the top to the legs and floor. It also serves to anchor what Nicholson calls "transverse bearers" that support the bench across its width like floor joists. It's not apparent from the engraving, but from the text there is apparently a narrower side board along the back of the bench to hold the other end of the transverse bearers. The result is what we call a torsion box. Clever design substitutes for mass in this bench. Perhaps a reason is that it is a joiners' bench intended to be transported to worksites rather than remaining in a workshop.

The dimensions of the bench are given as 10 to 12 feet long, about 2 feet 8 inches tall and about 2 feet 6 inches wide.