Just goofing around and saw this on EBAY. Someone must need these
for that BIN price... even if it is just to spiff up an old chuck.

Leo.... thinking of you here, sir...

http://tinyurl.com/hpwhh

Robert

Hi Robert, from this Leo, :))

Thanks for the heads up, Robert.
However this kind of jaws is just the reason I did NOT buy the other
chuck makes, it seems that a lot of people do not understand the real
advantage of the patented Oneway jaws profile, and by demand for those
smooth jaws, Oneway is supplying these smooth dovetail jaws.

I would say take a compass and some paper, then draw a 2" circle and
draw a circle just 1/4" smaller, cut this smallest circle out and cut
in 4 equal pie pieces, now lay those pie pieces against the 2" circle
line you drew first, now have a CLOSE LOOK and you will be amazed at
how small a area is contacted by that pie shape, and of course if you
would take the paper from where you cut out that smaller circle and cut
a 1/4 outside pie out and lay against the outside of the larger 2"
circle you will see the corners that hit the line.

So unless you use the patented Oneway wave form jaws you will have this
problem, the only way around is to cut EXACT spigots or recesses, and
then for some flexibility you need a great number of different jaw
sizes, not so with the Oneway wave jaws.

I can feel a storm brewing G and no I won't duck, people use the
other chucks all the time and there are times and places where a smooth
jaw chuck use is preferably, as are other kinds of chucking and holding
devises, a perfect for all and every use holding devise we do not have,
and who wants to admit that they should have thought more about what
they where going to buy, or that spending a little more for a better
thought out and flexible use product would have been the wiser choice.

It's just my way of thinking Robert

Have fun and take care
Leo Van Der Loo

wrote in message
oups.com...


I can feel a storm brewing G and no I won't duck, people use the
other chucks all the time and there are times and places where a smooth
jaw chuck use is preferably, as are other kinds of chucking and holding
devises, a perfect for all and every use holding devise we do not have,
and who wants to admit that they should have thought more about what
they where going to buy, or that spending a little more for a better
thought out and flexible use product would have been the wiser choice.

What Leo has difficulty comprehending is that the jaws he describes damage
the wood, precisely because the contact area is _less_ than the smooth
jaws.

Strength of the wood is measured as a resistance to a force per unit of
area. Total Force = Force/unit * number of units. Stands to reason that
if you have knife ridges as your primary contact points, there is a
tremendous amount of force on a small area, which is why they penetrate and
deform the fibers. The smooth jaws provide a greater contact area, depress
the resiliant surface rather than sever the fiber, and since the total force
is a multiple, they require less crank on your tightening device. All you
need is snug, not grip.

If you can live with mangled wood fine and dandy. Crank down and chew
things up. But when you look at what you've done afterward, notice that as
the fibers are pushed away by the ridges, they also push you out of register
with the face of the jaws, denying you the resistance to deformation
perpendicular to the axis of rotation which is what prevents a catch from
dismounting the piece. The dovetail draws the wood in toward itself as it
is expanded or contracted, making that contact firm and sure.

People who grab things with serrated jaws are the ones who complain about
having to re-true the outside after reversing, because they have difficulty
getting a full seating. They are the ones who tell you you have to "settle"
for a certain degree of error. People who use smooth dovetails can mount as
true as the shoulder they have made for an outside grip, or the interior
shoulder they have made for an inside grip. They can take the piece off,
and if dissatisfied, re-mount and trim where the design does not please,
because their hold is _still_ circular and undamaged, available for use.
They don't have to try and make the serrations fit into old grooves, or,
after realizing that's not possible, try to get a whole fresh area to
crunch.

Additional advantage to inside dovetails, if you're trying for depth on a
bowl made with the outside of a log as the bottom, is that you need only cut
away enough to allow entry for your expansion jaws. Gives you as much extra
depth as the length of the tenon you would have made, only to turn away
later. With an external dovetail you don't have to trim away ugly
compressed and chewed wood if you can make the groove part of your design.

Take a careful look at
http://s35.photobucket.com/albums/d1...t=bb09ce26.jpg

Look at 5:00 o'clock and you will see the artifact from the interior hold,
as yet unsanded. The artifact of the exterior hold, because this piece was
done as a demo, are around 2:00 o'clock. No vacuum chucks, no cole jaws,
just a quick sandpaper cleanup and then a finish.

Hi All

Anyone who wants to see the mangled crushed and chewed up wood have a
look at the link provided.

A larger than 20" bowl turned without tailstock support on a Oneway
chuck, and as several turners have tried to tell a certain person that
there is NO Mangled or Crushed or Chewed up wood, it does not seem to
sink in, so for all who would like to assert themselves of the facts
without the BS, have a look.

http://homepage.mac.com/l.vanderloo/PhotoAlbum26.html

Have fun and take care
Leo Van Der Loo

It could be that you are BOTH right. It is undeniably true that a set of
round jaws that do not fit the wood will hold poorly, with high contact
pressure at the points of contact. One-way solves this problem by a set of
"wavy" jaws which fit better over a range of sizes. On the other hand, if
the spigot or recess is matched to the diameter of the jaws, contact is
spread over a large area, so there is less damage to the wood than the
"wavy" jaws would produce.

I started with the One-way chuck, and I like the way it holds. I couldn't
care less about the jaw marks, 'cause I can always clean that up afterwards
using Cole jaws, a jam chuck or a vacuum chuck. (I'm not a production
turner, though.)

Hi Leo (The Other One)

That is exactly what I said Leo.

By cutting the exact spigot or recess, you have the complete surface
holding, but then you need more jaw sets for some flexibility, in the
sizes you can make them.
Also said that one way of holding does not fit all and every possible
situation.
However I do feel that the Oneway chuck and jaws do give me the most
flexible secure holding system.
As for the jaw marks on wet wood, there is little, and with some care
on dry wood, there is none.
Not only that but I very very seldom do not change the foot to a more
pleasing shape (my opinion OKGG) and turn the held surface away.

Have fun and take care
Leo Van Der Loo

"Leo Lichtman" wrote in message
...
It could be that you are BOTH right. It is undeniably true that a set of
round jaws that do not fit the wood will hold poorly, with high contact
pressure at the points of contact. One-way solves this problem by a set
of "wavy" jaws which fit better over a range of sizes. On the other hand,
if the spigot or recess is matched to the diameter of the jaws, contact is
spread over a large area, so there is less damage to the wood than the
"wavy" jaws would produce.

I started with the One-way chuck, and I like the way it holds. I couldn't
care less about the jaw marks, 'cause I can always clean that up
afterwards using Cole jaws, a jam chuck or a vacuum chuck. (I'm not a
production turner, though.)

Leo's using some of that non-Euclidian geometry, I guess.

Straight line meets a circle at one point only. If that straight line is
interrupted in a second dimension, as it is with serrations, only the sharp
points meet. Such can only begin to contact as much area as a smooth
circular jaw after the serrations are embedded. Further, any curve,
regardless the difference in radii, is a better fit to another curve than a
straight line. Given the flexibility of wood, a reasonably close fit will
get a tremendous amount of metal in contact within springback limit.

Lots of good iron out there if you know how to use it. Some is getting
downright inexpensive, without, it would appear, the drawbacks we expect
from paying less. Just remember when you choose your chuck, and your mount
when turning, that you don't have to have a certain kind of jaw to hold your
work securely, you have to have a concept of what constitutes a secure hold.
A good hold has parallel and perpendicular aspects, and just as the M/T wood
joint it imitates, the wood held by the sides of the tenon is subject to
forces which are countered by the shoulder. Choose your jaws to provide the
most easily and repeatably certain way of doing this - wedge 'em.

Ordered my 75mm set from Lee Valley with my birthday gift card. Couldn't
convince the spouse that I should be able to tap the family resources while
that card awaited some special purpose. As I look at the design, I can see
that they will be a great choice for tenon holds on smaller stock like
branch turnings, which don't approach the size to be held in the 100mm set.
May see more use there than with bowls. Good broad contact areas for
stability. Gotta love the self-adjusting feature that comes only with
smooth metal making a best-fit average rather than forcing the issue by
digging in early, too....

wrote:
Anyone who wants to see the mangled crushed and chewed up wood have a
look at the link provided.
A larger than 20" bowl turned without tailstock support on a Oneway
chuck, and as several turners have tried to tell a certain person that
there is NO Mangled or Crushed or Chewed up wood, it does not seem to
sink in, so for all who would like to assert themselves of the facts
without the BS, have a look.
http://homepage.mac.com/l.vanderloo/PhotoAlbum26.html

I might be missing something here, but don't Oneway jaws only have the
wavy profile on the inside for gripping tenons? As far as I can see the
outsides are perfectly circular, which is what you used here for
gripping the recess.

My feeling is that while the wavy shape of the Oneway jaws is a useful
idea, the power of their grip is achieved as much by the ridged surfaces
which bite into the wood, as much as it is to do with the profile.

--
Derek Andrews, woodturner

http://www.seafoamwoodturning.com
http://chipshop.blogspot.com - a blog for my customers
http://www.seafoamwoodturning.com/TheToolrest/ - a blog for woodturners

Hi Derek
Yes the jaws have the same ridges on the outside as on the inside,
however the outside has a circular shape and not the wave form.

I could go out to my drying cabin and make a hundred pictures of tenons
that will show no mangled crushed or chewed up wood as was said in the
response to my answer that I did prefer the wavy chuck jaws, because
they hold better than the smooth jaws in most cases and the tenon size
can be varied to ones liking.

In my album of bowl bottoms are 2 pictures of small tenons on soft wood
(Ailanthus) one is a larger shallow bowl and just rough turned, you can
see the grip marks on that one, on the finished bowls you will not find
any holding marks.

http://homepage.mac.com/l.vanderloo/PhotoAlbum23.html

Have fun and take care
Leo Van Der Loo

wrote:
Hi Robert, from this Leo, :))
I can feel a storm brewing G and no I won't duck, people use the
other chucks all the time and there are times and places where a smooth
jaw chuck use is preferably, as are other kinds of chucking and holding
devises, a perfect for all and every use holding devise we do not have,
and who wants to admit that they should have thought more about what
they where going to buy, or that spending a little more for a better
thought out and flexible use product would have been the wiser choice.

It's just my way of thinking Robert

Have fun and take care
Leo Van Der Loo

Well Leo, your way of thinking is certainly good enough for me. I have
been to the website, seen your work, and read you well thought out and
intelligent posts here for far too long to doubt what you are saying
about Oneway chucks, (or Oneway anything for that matter!) especially
since I don't own any Oneway tools.

I especially agree that we don't have any one device to hold everything
we can imagine. I still use faceplates, even thought I have two
Vicmarc 120s with 3 different jaw sets. One chuck is configured one
way (no pun intended) and one is configured another way depending on
what I am doing.

No need to duck... I am certainly glad to hear your opinion.

Even though I wouldn't trade my Vics for any Oneway.... ;^)

Robert