Jointer expectations from the mill?

Page 4 of 5  
On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 17:22:14 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Barss

A literary reference. And on exactly the level I would have expected. Very impressive, Andy.
(if you speak with tongue in cheek but you have a sharp tongue, you run the risk of doing yourself an injury)
Regards,
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1 /
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Andrew Barss" wrote in message

"Swingman" wrote in message:

"Swingman" wrote in message:

Try again ...
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/29/06
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I have a planer. No jointer. I buy all my wood rough. In no way is a jointer a necessary tool. If you just want one, fine but I can't see having one myself. I doubt I ever will.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"CW" wrote in message

Can't argue with you at all on that count, I spent 30 years of woodworking without a jointer ... however, what you apparently missed was the context.
To do what the previous posters were advocating (the part of the quote included in my reply above) _ using a jointer in the proper sequence_, owning a jointer IS necessary to the methodology being proposed ... even it is just a jointer plane.
The point of my quote above: no sense in leading the OP repeatedly through the process if he doesn't own a jointer.
My mistake was in thinking that would have been obvious to someone following the thread, obviously not.
Mea culpa ... I really should know better after over 8,000 posts on the wRec ... you really have to watch what you say around here as there are a few who obviously have nothing else to do but argue their misconceptions, or what they have erroneously perceived.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/29/06
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

All those fools who own 'em are wrong, I see.
Get one, it'll save a lot of time. If you're a process over product, sweat on!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Fools owning tools is wrong, I agree. They may well hurt themselves.

Should justify it's existance in about 2050. I have better things to do with my money.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Call those steps 1, 2, 3, and 4 respectively.
You must do 1 before 2 or 3. You must do 2 before 4. 2 and 3 may be done in either order. 3 and 4 may be done in either order.
Thus, the order of all four steps can be 1234, 1243, or 1324.

You don't necessarily -- it depends on how clean the jointed face is. If the rough board has a slight twist or bow [*], generally you need to joint the first face completely flat across its full width and length in order to produce a stable reference surface for the planer. Then, the decision whether to plane that face or not depends mostly on whether your planer will give you an even smoother surface than you have from the jointer. If the rough board is cupped, however, you don't need to joint it completely flat before planing the opposite face -- but you will need to plane the jointed face again.
[* -- Boards with moderate or severe twist or bow should never see the inside of your shop. Leave those at the lumberyard. Even if you can reduce the degree of warp by cutting them into smaller pieces, and get them jointed flat, they often don't stay that way. Better to start out with lumber that doesn't have that problem to begin with. ]
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The normal procedure should be face joint, then plane, then joint one edge with reference to one of the flat faces, then rip to get the last edge parallel to the other and perpendicular to a face.
At least that's how I do it. It's been working for me.
So when I read your posting, I assumed you meant you simply wanted them to face joint one face, you'd do the planing to thickness. If that face that was jointed had "divots" or mill marks remaining, it's likely that it's flat enough to go into the planer. You'd just have to make sure to flip it over and plane that face too.
If what you did was have them joint a face, you *could* joint an edge perpendicular to that face, but it may or may not get tearout, depending on the direction of the grain to that single flat face.
So precisely what'd you ask them to do?
BTW, sometimes if the lumber is naturally "flat" you might be able to get away with using the planer only. But that's not the "recommended" procedure.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

OK, I thought it was Face Joint, Edge Joint, Plane, Rip. But I've seen a few variations.

That's what I'm hoping, but we'll see.

They Jointed a Face and an Edge. This is what my buddy says he gets done, but he uses a different supplier and has his own jointer.

I was wondering about this, most of the boards in the pile looked pretty flat and straight.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Frankly, I'm amazed that a sawmill operation would even have jointing capability. Skip planing is becoming pretty common in our area, so that automated scanning can select the cuts at the factories, but jointing is something you do last, to get a smooth edge. Edging and ripsawing is enough to get through the grading and stacking process. Must mean a millwork type place?
As you see, some go by mantra, some by sense in the order of business. Personal preference is to get a straight edge to trim to, so I can have a more accurate cut plan and match my material list right away. Can be chalk line/bandsaw or jointer on coarse deep cut. Then the rip on the tablesaw to clear defects like wane or slash knots, sometimes reduce a crowned board to two narrower pieces which will give full thickness after planing. No sense wasting time and effort on kindling. With everything still oversize and spares built in, I'm now ready to prepare boards.
Face, surface, join is the order from there on out. Got to have a reference to start with, and it's a lot easier to square to a face than to face to an edge!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Fine so far... but next, we disagree.

If the board isn't pretty close to flat already, you're running a significant risk of binding and kickback by ripping on a tablesaw. Better to use a bandsaw for this step if the board hasn't been face-jointed yet.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I "left those at the lumberyard," or in my case, the sawmill. You do what you're comfortable with as far as width reduction. Can also save some thickness if you knock either side off.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 13:17:13 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:

Yes. Definitely.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Yeah, that can work. Heck, I've probably done it. But if you joint an edge right away, you *might* have to joint your edge against the grain.

This is good to ask for when you don't own a jointer but do own a TS and a planer. Good idea.

The bed I built for wifey and I was made exactly that way. The size of the planks exceeded the width of my jointer, but not the width I could plane. I took a long look at the planks and decided that if I was careful I could get away with using planer only. It worked that time, but won't always. Remember, the planer has to press the wood to the bed to get 'er to move through. That much pressure can temporarily flatten it yet let it spring back to it's formerly warped state (cup, twist, ect.) In this case, not only was the wood naturally pretty flat, it was 2 inches thick. My lunchbox probably can't flatten that no matter what.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Bill Stock" wrote in message

Your problem appears to be is one of not thoroughly understanding industry terminology.
S2S lumber is, by definition, surfaced (planed) on two faces and both edges are rough.
Not trying to be a smartass, but you'll have a better experience next time if you just tell them your expectations/what you want, instead of using terminology without a full understanding of the definition.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/29/06
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Just to clarify, I didn't actually tell the mill I wanted S2S, I told them I wanted my lumber jointed on 1 Face and 1 Edge. I only used the S2S term here. The mill was actually telling one guy they would process his lumber as S3S, which I assume actually meant jointed and planed.

Not a problem, if I had a thin skin I wouldn't post here.
Thanks to Barry, Toller, Doug and George M for the advice.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Bill Stock" wrote in message

"S3S" usually equates to "S2S1E" - surfaced two faces and 1 edge ... which would be a excellent choice for you/someone with no jointer, and with a planer and table saw.
... but that S3S designation could vary according to lumber type and region. I've bought cedar as S3S where it was one surface faced and two edges straight line ripped.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/29/06
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Quite a long thread about terminology. I guess I have it good with my main supplier.
Q. How thick do you want it? A. 3/4"
Done in just a minute at no additional cost.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

which means *planed* two faces, not *jointed*.

That doesn't make any sense at all. If he has no jointer, but he does have a planer and a table saw, then the last thing he wants to buy is wood that hasn't been jointed (and therefore still needs to be). He should be buying exactly what he asked the lumberyard for: jointed one face and one edge. He can then use his table saw and planer to surface the other edge and face.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

This thread has gone on too long arguing over interpretations.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.