And George,

Don't forget about corrugated wood soles, and why don't we
have them?   :-)

Jim Cook (ducking back under the porch)

> -----Original Message----->
>
> Hallo big mouthed Galoots !
>
> Or is it loose-lipped ?  Certainly not tight-mouthed ...
>
> Ahem.  It's been stated that steel expands more than wood.
>
> At first glance, such a claim might be challenged on the
> basis of a comparison of their thermal expansion coefficients.
>
> But waytaminnit.  Steel conducts heat a whole lot better
> than wood; it's got a bigger heat capacity (mostly 'cuz of
> its greater density); and there's more friction between the
> bottom of an iron plane and the workpiece (which is wood,
> but not the wood whereof we speak) than for a woodie working
> on the same hunk of wood.  That would suggest (more exact
> calculations or a simple 'spurrimint being in order here)
> that the iron plane would distort more than the woodie,
> because most of the iron plane's sole would heat up but
> be constrained by the cooler cheeks; for the woodie, on
> the other hand, just a small fraction of the sole would
> get warm, and the remaining portion of the woodie's body
> would stay (sounds like the old, "how much wood could a
> woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood," dittie)
> cool, so the woodie might not go quite as much convex as
> the iron plane.
>
> It'd be whole lot easier just to try it than it would to spend
> a week with the calculus book & the Handbook of Chemistry &
> Physics open to "thermodynamic properties of condensed matter ..."
>
> The List & Todd have got me gettin' practical a bit, I fear.
>
> Best regards,
> George Langford, in the arid SE of PA.
> amenex@a...
> http://www.amenex.com/georgesbasement/

Hallo big mouthed Galoots !

Or is it loose-lipped ?  Certainly not tight-mouthed ...

Ahem.  It's been stated that steel expands more than wood.

At first glance, such a claim might be challenged on the
basis of a comparison of their thermal expansion coefficients.

But waytaminnit.  Steel conducts heat a whole lot better
than wood; it's got a bigger heat capacity (mostly 'cuz of
its greater density); and there's more friction between the
bottom of an iron plane and the workpiece (which is wood,
but not the wood whereof we speak) than for a woodie working
on the same hunk of wood.  That would suggest (more exact
calculations or a simple 'spurrimint being in order here)
that the iron plane would distort more than the woodie,
because most of the iron plane's sole would heat up but
be constrained by the cooler cheeks; for the woodie, on
the other hand, just a small fraction of the sole would
get warm, and the remaining portion of the woodie's body
would stay (sounds like the old, "how much wood could a
woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood," dittie)
cool, so the woodie might not go quite as much convex as
the iron plane.

It'd be whole lot easier just to try it than it would to spend
a week with the calculus book & the Handbook of Chemistry &
Physics open to "thermodynamic properties of condensed matter ..."

The List & Todd have got me gettin' practical a bit, I fear.

Best regards,
George Langford, in the arid SE of PA.
amenex@a...
http://www.amenex.com/georgesbasement/

~  -----Original Message-----
~  From: owner-oldtools@l...
~  [mailto:owner-oldtools@l...]On Behalf Of Minch
~  Sent: Saturday, August 07, 1999 1:35 PM
~  To: amenex@a...; Old Tools
~  Subject: Re: Mouth too tight ?
~
~  However, a hand plane has the blade sticking down a
~  measurable amount.
~  Imagine a scrub plane set rank - what touches the wood?  If
~  you bear down
~  on the handle it would be the toe and throat in front of the
~  blade, while
~  the bed of the plane is parallel to, but not quite touching,
~  the surface
~  of the wood.  If you bear down on the tote it would be the heel and
~  throat behind the blade, and the bed would be at a slight
~  angle to the
~  surface of the wood with the toe sticking slightly up in the
~  air.  In
~  order to get three point contact, something would have to
~  give - distort.

It does, see my posting of a few days ago.

~  Now distorting a piece of metal causes it to heat up a
~  little (break a
~  paper clip by bending back and forth).  This repeated
~  distortion as you
~  stroke may contribute a bit of heat along with the friction,
~  more so with
~  a metal plane than wood - you can't distort the wood (if the
~  plane is
~  thick).

~  Does this mean that the wood plane is not - cannot-
~  make three
~  point contact with the wood??

Why not? A wooden beam will deflect under load. One can conjecture
that we have the entire toe area in contact with a line of contact
under the heel of both wooden and metal planes.

~  It might be interesting for one you lab rats to measure the surface
~  temperature of a wooden and a metal plane after use.  I'd do
~  it, but I
~  don't have a good thermometer.

No android I, I'd prefer to let both the plane and myself cool off,
even in our temperate climes. 8-).

Thanks for some nice elegant speculation!

Jeff

At 12:34 PM +0000 8/7/99, Minch wrote:
>Now distorting a piece of metal causes it to heat up a little.
>This repeated distortion as you
>stroke may contribute a bit of heat along with the friction, more so with
>a metal plane than wood - you can't distort the wood (if the plane is
>thick).  Does this mean that the wood plane is not - cannot- make three
>point contact with the wood??

        Call me dense (you won't be the first), but I don't follow the
connection between the heat distortion thing and the three point contact
thing.

>It might be interesting for one you lab rats to measure the surface
>temperature of a wooden and a metal plane after use.

        Interesting, but by what parameters?  Plane *real fast* for "X"
minutes?  Press *real hard*?  On what wood?  What kind of surface (already
*fairly* smooth)?  Lap and wax first?  And doesn't the heat dissipate just
about as fast as it builds up?  I've managed to get the sole of a plane
fairly warm to the touch, but never raised a blister by touching the sole
after planing.  How hot does it need to be to distort?
        I'm also curious, but I can't help but think that the answers to
these questions are not going to be... um..what's the word....*relevant* to
anything I do with a plane.
                Tom Holloway

~  -----Original Message-----
~  From: owner-oldtools@l...
~  [mailto:owner-oldtools@l...]On Behalf Of Tom
~  Holloway
~  Sent: Monday, August 09, 1999 2:46 AM
~  To: oldtools@l...
~  Subject: Re: Mouth too tight ?
~
~       I'm also curious, but I can't help but think that the answers to
~  these questions are not going to be... um..what's the
~  word....*relevant* to
~  anything I do with a plane.

True enough, but ain't armchair speculation a bit of fun, and perhaps
a more complete understanding an aid to integration of man/Esther and
the tool?

Jeff