A thought came to mind today whilst sharpening some gouges, what is the
optimum grind.

Let me explain

If I grind a tool on a 3 inch wheel I get a bevel with a radius of 1.5
inches,
but
If I grind a tool on a 12inch wheel I get a bevel with radius of 6
inches.

I would guess that the ideal radius of the grind would be larger than
the radius of the piece of work? My understanding is that if the radius
of the bevel were less then you would ride the back of the bevel until
the front touches, nothing in between, with an increased chance of dig
in on contact. If it is larger radius you can pivot on any point of the
bevel till the front touches, better control and less chance of dig in
on contact..

So assuming I have this correct, what is the best bevel radius to use
when you start getting to a really large diameter turning say 24inch
dia? Would no bevel be the best option ?

--
John

On Mar 18, 2:20 pm, John wrote:
A thought came to mind today whilst sharpening some gouges, what is the
optimum grind.

Let me explain

If I grind a tool on a 3 inch wheel I get a bevel with a radius of 1.5
inches,
but
If I grind a tool on a 12inch wheel I get a bevel with radius of 6
inches.

I would guess that the ideal radius of the grind would be larger than
the radius of the piece of work? My understanding is that if the radius
of the bevel were less then you would ride the back of the bevel until
the front touches, nothing in between, with an increased chance of dig
in on contact. If it is larger radius you can pivot on any point of the
bevel till the front touches, better control and less chance of dig in
on contact..

So assuming I have this correct, what is the best bevel radius to use
when you start getting to a really large diameter turning say 24inch
dia? Would no bevel be the best option ?

--
John



Hello John,

What many people do to eliminate or reduce this problem is the use two
bevels. One is a short or narrow bevel at the cutting edge and then a
secondary bevel which grinds away a part of the heal of the bevel.
With this method, there is a very short bevel riding on the wood and
the problems you describe disappear. The actual cutting bevel is
generally about 1/16 inch to 1/8 inch wide. The rest of the normal
bevel is ground away at a different angle to get it out of the way
when turning.

My recommendation would be to give it a try and see how you like it.
I've used tools with no more that a 1/16 inch wide bevel with
excellent success. Several well known turners do this.

Fred Holder
http://www.morewoodturning.net

I don't know if it makes any real difference, especially on the
outside of the bowl which is convex, although most use an 8 inch
wheel, and some a 6 inch wheel, and some others use a metal belt
sander which will leave a flat surface. On the inside of the bowl,
which is concave, you will be riding more on the back point of the
bevel. I do relieve the edge of the bevel for inside the bowl turning
so the sharp edge of the bevel isn't rubbing on and bruising the wood.
I have never tried a double bevel, but do have gouges with a couple of
different bevel angles from more pointy for the outside, to very blunt
for the bottom of the bowl.
robo hippy

On Mar 18, 3:36*pm, Fred Holder wrote:
On Mar 18, 2:20 pm, John wrote:



A thought came to mind today whilst sharpening some gouges, what is the
optimum grind.

Let me explain

If I grind a tool on a 3 inch wheel I get a bevel with a radius of 1.5
inches,
but
If I grind a tool on a 12inch wheel I get a bevel with radius of 6
inches.

I would guess that the ideal radius of the grind would be larger than
the radius of the piece of work? My understanding is that if the radius
of the bevel were less then you would ride the back of the bevel until
the front touches, nothing in between, with an increased chance of dig
in on contact. If it is larger radius you can pivot on any point of the
bevel till the front touches, better control *and less chance of dig in
on contact..

So assuming I have this correct, what is the best bevel radius to use
when you start getting to a really large diameter turning say 24inch
dia? Would no bevel be the best option ?

--
John

Hello John,

What many people do to eliminate or reduce this problem is the use two
bevels. One is a short or narrow bevel at the cutting edge and then a
secondary bevel which grinds away a part of the heal of the bevel.
With this method, there is a very short bevel riding on the wood and
the problems you describe disappear. The actual cutting bevel is
generally about 1/16 inch to 1/8 inch wide. The rest of the normal
bevel is ground away at a different angle to get it out of the way
when turning.

My recommendation would be to give it a try and see how you like it.
I've used tools with no more that a 1/16 inch wide bevel with
excellent success. Several well known turners do this.

Fred Holder
http://www.morewoodturning.net

"David Wade" wrote in message
...
John, "Riding the bevel" is a convenient concept that helps beginners
gently move the tool into a cutting orientation. Many seem to think they
are riding the heel of the bevel at the same time as the cutting edge. You
have just figured out that it doesn't make sense. Congratulations.


He speaks the truth. You guide parallel to the edge, allowing the wood to
slide down and separate the shaving by skewing the tool.

SNIP

Essentially, with a gouge you want to cut with the lower edge on a tangent
to the circle. Starting by riding the bevel and increasing the angle until
shavings start to appear is the safest and surest way to accomplish that.


Get the tool firm to the rest, use a steep entry angle and/or the pointy
portion of your grind to poke into the cut, laying the tool back on enough
bevel to guide as the shaving begins. "Riding" the bevel, as in the type of
prying action the term implies, will get bruised wood in the fresh cut
areas.

The term "riding the bevel" confused the heck out of me.

I kept getting these funny marks on the outside of the bowls that were
fibers slightly roughed up, not smooth.

I've heard them called bruises.

I couldn't get rid of them until it was pointed out to me that "riding
the bevel" didn't mean pressing the bevel into the wood. For me the
better term is "guiding on the bevel" to hold the cutting edge in the
right position, but putting pressure on the tool guide to hold the
tool steady, and light pressure against the cutting edge, to feed the
tool into the cut. (And if the light pressure became heavy pressure,
to take a few seconds and sharpen said bevel).

Made a world of improvement in my cuts, so now I am on to other and
greater faults.

Old Guy


On Mar 18, 5:20*pm, John wrote:
A thought came to mind today whilst sharpening some gouges, what is the
optimum grind.

Let me explain

If I grind a tool on a 3 inch wheel I get a bevel with a radius of 1.5
inches,
but
If I grind a tool on a 12inch wheel I get a bevel with radius of 6
inches.

I would guess that the ideal radius of the grind would be larger than
the radius of the piece of work? My understanding is that if the radius
of the bevel were less then you would ride the back of the bevel until
the front touches, nothing in between, with an increased chance of dig
in on contact. If it is larger radius you can pivot on any point of the
bevel till the front touches, better control *and less chance of dig in
on contact..

So assuming I have this correct, what is the best bevel radius to use
when you start getting to a really large diameter turning say 24inch
dia? Would no bevel be the best option ?

--
John

Thanks for making this original post and thanks to those who replied.
This "riding the bevel" has been a total mystery to me.
Even when I see videos of woodturning, the craftsman often doesn't
really seem to be "riding the bevel". They seem to be using the gouge
as a scraper. OTOH, I see some pretty shiny looking cuts just behind the
tool. Aren't they from the bevel rubbing on the work?

Pete Stanaitis
---------------------

John wrote:
A thought came to mind today whilst sharpening some gouges, what is the
optimum grind.

Let me explain

If I grind a tool on a 3 inch wheel I get a bevel with a radius of 1.5
inches,
but
If I grind a tool on a 12inch wheel I get a bevel with radius of 6 inches.

I would guess that the ideal radius of the grind would be larger than
the radius of the piece of work? My understanding is that if the radius
of the bevel were less then you would ride the back of the bevel until
the front touches, nothing in between, with an increased chance of dig
in on contact. If it is larger radius you can pivot on any point of the
bevel till the front touches, better control and less chance of dig in
on contact..

So assuming I have this correct, what is the best bevel radius to use
when you start getting to a really large diameter turning say 24inch
dia? Would no bevel be the best option ?

When I use the shear cut (handle down, and the swept back edge at a
high angle with no bevel rub) I never get the shiny surface that I get
when I rub the bevel. I always figured that this was because riding
the bevel would actually burnish the wood. It doesn't seem to make any
difference in how smooth the final cut is, or if I am using the
scraper or a gouge for the final shear cut, the surface still feels
smooth.
robo hippy

On Mar 19, 7:23*am, spaco wrote:
Thanks for making this original post and thanks to those who replied.
This "riding the bevel" has been a total mystery to me.
* *Even when I see videos of woodturning, the craftsman often doesn't
really seem to be "riding the bevel". *They seem to be using the gouge
as a scraper. OTOH, I see some pretty shiny looking cuts just behind the
tool. * Aren't they from the bevel rubbing on the work?

Pete Stanaitis
---------------------

John wrote:
A thought came to mind today whilst sharpening some gouges, what is the
optimum grind.

Let me explain

If I grind a tool on a 3 inch wheel I get a bevel with a radius of 1.5
inches,
but
If I grind a tool on a 12inch wheel I get a bevel with radius of 6 inches.

I would guess that the ideal radius of the grind would be larger than
the radius of the piece of work? My understanding is that if the radius
of the bevel were less then you would ride the back of the bevel until
the front touches, nothing in between, with an increased chance of dig
in on contact. If it is larger radius you can pivot on any point of the
bevel till the front touches, better control *and less chance of dig in
on contact..

So assuming I have this correct, what is the best bevel radius to use
when you start getting to a really large diameter turning say 24inch
dia? Would no bevel be the best option ?

Burnishing with the bevel 'riding hard' on the wood is why I don't like
to rough out with a skew.

You are right on robo. Once I get a 'bevel burnish' mark, it wants to
last thru the whole turning process and even tries to show up on my
display shelf.

Reverse sanding seems to heal the bruises somewhat, but it can leave a
scab and later a faint scar.


Turn to Safety, Arch
Fortiter


http://community.webtv.net/almcc/MacsMusings

On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 22:20:30 GMT, John wrote:

A thought came to mind today whilst sharpening some gouges, what is the
optimum grind.

Let me explain

If I grind a tool on a 3 inch wheel I get a bevel with a radius of 1.5
inches,
but
If I grind a tool on a 12inch wheel I get a bevel with radius of 6
inches.

I would guess that the ideal radius of the grind would be larger than
the radius of the piece of work? My understanding is that if the radius
of the bevel were less then you would ride the back of the bevel until
the front touches, nothing in between, with an increased chance of dig
in on contact. If it is larger radius you can pivot on any point of the
bevel till the front touches, better control and less chance of dig in
on contact..

So assuming I have this correct, what is the best bevel radius to use
when you start getting to a really large diameter turning say 24inch
dia? Would no bevel be the best option ?
You got some great answers, John, and I learned form your post, so thanks for
bringing it up..
Hell, I've been trying to ride the whole damn bevel for years, since George
advised me too.. Now that I know what the term really means, I realize that I'm
actually doing it right when I don't "ride the bevel"..lol
Like a lot of things, I needed more knowledge/experience before I could
understand George's advise...

A tip I picked up a few years ago that helped me quite a bit was to quit trying
to sharpen the edge of a tool.. it never worked..
You sharpen the bevel and the edge will take care of itself...

A very simple fact that I just learned (maybe that's why my sharpening sucks) is
that if you can see an edge, it isn't sharp...


mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

AHHA!!!!

Pete Stanaitis
--------------

Arch wrote:
Burnishing with the bevel 'riding hard' on the wood is why I don't like
to rough out with a skew.

You are right on robo. Once I get a 'bevel burnish' mark, it wants to
last thru the whole turning process and even tries to show up on my
display shelf.

Reverse sanding seems to heal the bruises somewhat, but it can leave a
scab and later a faint scar.


Turn to Safety, Arch
Fortiter


http://community.webtv.net/almcc/MacsMusings

In message
,
Fred Holder writes

Hello John,

What many people do to eliminate or reduce this problem is the use two
bevels. One is a short or narrow bevel at the cutting edge and then a
secondary bevel which grinds away a part of the heal of the bevel.
With this method, there is a very short bevel riding on the wood and
the problems you describe disappear. The actual cutting bevel is
generally about 1/16 inch to 1/8 inch wide. The rest of the normal
bevel is ground away at a different angle to get it out of the way
when turning.

My recommendation would be to give it a try and see how you like it.
I've used tools with no more that a 1/16 inch wide bevel with
excellent success. Several well known turners do this.

Fred Holder

Fred,

After reading yours, and the other posts I think you have hit the nail
on the head, with the use of 2 bevels. The cutting bevel means that the
tool cutting edge has body behind it giving strength, and the second
bevel, which could be called a clearance bevel as it gives clearance
from the surface giving greater manoeuvrability. This to me makes most
sense, so I will be giving it a try shortly.

It also makes sense from a grinding point of view. Using a scraper for
example, if you first grind the clearance bevel, and then the effort to
grind the cutting bevel would be minimal, as there is less meat to take
away. Obviously as the cutting bevel is re-ground over time the
clearance bevel would diminish.

Another issue I have seen in cheaper tools is that the bevel is often at
45 degrees, which provides an inherent weakness at the tip. But if a
cutting bevel is now ground at the correct angle, you have a default
clearance bevel for free. Though I suspect this would need looking into
a little further as the heat dissipation of the tool would likely be
reduced due to less metal in the clearance bevel.
--
John

In message , Arch
writes
Burnishing with the bevel 'riding hard' on the wood is why I don't like
to rough out with a skew.

You are right on robo. Once I get a 'bevel burnish' mark, it wants to
last thru the whole turning process and even tries to show up on my
display shelf.

Reverse sanding seems to heal the bruises somewhat, but it can leave a
scab and later a faint scar.


Turn to Safety, Arch

Arch,
taking this a step further in understanding the 'bevel burnish mark'.
As you say they don't want to go away.

My thoughts are the mark is caused by the localised drying of the wood,
caused by the friction created by the tool. This drying penetrating some
distance into the wood as the moisture in the fibres decreases.
Basically the wood shrinks back.

I wonder if the addition of moisture to the marks would 'revitalise'
the wood?

Maybe this is an experiment in the making
--
John

In message , mac davis
writes
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 22:20:30 GMT, John wrote:
You got some great answers, John, and I learned form your post, so thanks for
bringing it up..
Hell, I've been trying to ride the whole damn bevel for years, since George
advised me too.. Now that I know what the term really means, I realize that I'm
actually doing it right when I don't "ride the bevel"..lol

Mac, I wonder how many people never ride the bevel, just present the
tool and cut ?

I know I am probably taking a risk, but I so often find I just present
the tool at the exact angle needed and get on with it, its almost like
an inbuilt instinct for what is right. I almost have to consciously
force the tool to ride the bevel before contact. I keep saying to myself
I must do better , but it hasn't worked yet

A good example is a winged object where you spend most of the time
turning air, riding the bevel isn't easy, just slowly presenting the
tool

Maybe this is why I was able to create captive rings within my first few
hours of turning back in September, and not doing one till last weekend
I created a captive ring only 1/2 inch diameter on a 1 1/2 inch tall
goblet.

--
John

John wrote:
In message , mac davis
writes
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 22:20:30 GMT, John wrote:
You got some great answers, John, and I learned form your post, so thanks for
bringing it up..
Hell, I've been trying to ride the whole damn bevel for years, since George
advised me too.. Now that I know what the term really means, I realize that I'm
actually doing it right when I don't "ride the bevel"..lol

Mac, I wonder how many people never ride the bevel, just present the
tool and cut ?

I know I am probably taking a risk, but I so often find I just present
the tool at the exact angle needed and get on with it, its almost like
an inbuilt instinct for what is right. I almost have to consciously
force the tool to ride the bevel before contact. I keep saying to myself
I must do better , but it hasn't worked yet

A good example is a winged object where you spend most of the time
turning air, riding the bevel isn't easy, just slowly presenting the
tool

Maybe this is why I was able to create captive rings within my first few
hours of turning back in September, and not doing one till last weekend
I created a captive ring only 1/2 inch diameter on a 1 1/2 inch tall
goblet.

I used it as a learning tool, and for safety, when I first started
turning. Now it is automatic to use the tool at the correct angle and
I don't have to slide down the bevel until it starts cutting.

--
Gerald Ross
Cochran, GA

I've got a mind like a.. a.. what's
that thing called?

"John" wrote in message
...
In message
,

Fred,

After reading yours, and the other posts I think you have hit the nail on
the head, with the use of 2 bevels. The cutting bevel means that the tool
cutting edge has body behind it giving strength, and the second bevel,
which could be called a clearance bevel as it gives clearance from the
surface giving greater manoeuvrability. This to me makes most sense, so I
will be giving it a try shortly.


Watch your regrinds. A long bevel planes shallow, a short bevel turns
corners, and a secondary bevel may just provide another heel to bruise the
work. It can also complicate your entry poke.

"Arch" wrote in message
...
Burnishing with the bevel 'riding hard' on the wood is why I don't like
to rough out with a skew.

You are right on robo. Once I get a 'bevel burnish' mark, it wants to
last thru the whole turning process and even tries to show up on my
display shelf.

Reverse sanding seems to heal the bruises somewhat, but it can leave a
scab and later a faint scar.



Wet the wood and decompress. If you've not been too ham-handed, it can get
things back up where you can get at 'em without further burnishing.

Enjoyed all of the "riding the bevel" things. One thing that I see very
little discussion of (and I am primarily talking about doing small bowls 12
inch diameter or less) is the typical speeds that people use for the various
operations. For example on my Jet 1442 when roughing a bowl, I work at the
slowest speed until the exterior is round (450RPM). As the turning gets
easier and everything comes into balance I find that I do most of my work
around 1200 RPM or so. If I have end grain "fuzzies" on the surface, I have
taken the speed up to 2000 RPM and use a very light touch with a freshly
honed gouge. I would just like to hear peoples thoughts on this.


"Gerald Ross" wrote in message
. ..
John wrote:
In message , mac davis
writes
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 22:20:30 GMT, John
wrote:
You got some great answers, John, and I learned form your post, so thanks
for
bringing it up..
Hell, I've been trying to ride the whole damn bevel for years, since
George
advised me too.. Now that I know what the term really means, I realize
that I'm
actually doing it right when I don't "ride the bevel"..lol

Mac, I wonder how many people never ride the bevel, just present the tool
and cut ?

I know I am probably taking a risk, but I so often find I just present
the tool at the exact angle needed and get on with it, its almost like an
inbuilt instinct for what is right. I almost have to consciously force
the tool to ride the bevel before contact. I keep saying to myself I must
do better , but it hasn't worked yet

A good example is a winged object where you spend most of the time
turning air, riding the bevel isn't easy, just slowly presenting the tool

Maybe this is why I was able to create captive rings within my first few
hours of turning back in September, and not doing one till last weekend I
created a captive ring only 1/2 inch diameter on a 1 1/2 inch tall
goblet.

I used it as a learning tool, and for safety, when I first started
turning. Now it is automatic to use the tool at the correct angle and I
don't have to slide down the bevel until it starts cutting.

--
Gerald Ross
Cochran, GA

I've got a mind like a.. a.. what's
that thing called?

"Bob Daun" wrote in message
. net...
Enjoyed all of the "riding the bevel" things. One thing that I see very
little discussion of (and I am primarily talking about doing small bowls
12 inch diameter or less) is the typical speeds that people use for the
various operations. For example on my Jet 1442 when roughing a bowl, I
work at the slowest speed until the exterior is round (450RPM). As the
turning gets easier and everything comes into balance I find that I do
most of my work around 1200 RPM or so. If I have end grain "fuzzies" on
the surface, I have taken the speed up to 2000 RPM and use a very light
touch with a freshly honed gouge. I would just like to hear peoples
thoughts on this.


You could slow the rate of cut and get the same effect. Lots of people
think that high speed gives them better cuts. No real reason why it should,
of course, save that the tool gets a chance to burnish the wood when the
speed is fast and the feed slow. We might take a thinner bite out of
respect for the danger a high speed poses, as well.

It'd look really nice if we could use carving tools, and the piece doesn't
move at all then....

On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 19:19:11 GMT, John wrote:


Mac, I wonder how many people never ride the bevel, just present the
tool and cut ?

I know I am probably taking a risk, but I so often find I just present
the tool at the exact angle needed and get on with it, its almost like
an inbuilt instinct for what is right. I almost have to consciously
force the tool to ride the bevel before contact. I keep saying to myself
I must do better , but it hasn't worked yet

A good example is a winged object where you spend most of the time
turning air, riding the bevel isn't easy, just slowly presenting the
tool

Maybe this is why I was able to create captive rings within my first few
hours of turning back in September, and not doing one till last weekend
I created a captive ring only 1/2 inch diameter on a 1 1/2 inch tall
goblet.

IMHO, If it's intuitive and works, go with it...
I've got a lot of suggestions here, some that I use, some I don't.. I think
skill levels and tools vary so much that there are very few "rules"..

Sort of like when I was into bowling.. Everyone has the "right" stance,
approach, release, etc...
We use to say that if a guy won the finals 2 years in a row by hiking the ball
like a quarterback, that would be the "right" style..

I see fantastic work by turners like Steve Russell, who grinds his gouges at
different angles depending on the type and depth of bowl, and Oland who created
fantastic work with a 1/4" bit in a holder...
Whatever works for you is where you want to be..


mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 20:14:56 GMT, "George" wrote:


"John" wrote in message
...
In message
,

Fred,

After reading yours, and the other posts I think you have hit the nail on
the head, with the use of 2 bevels. The cutting bevel means that the tool
cutting edge has body behind it giving strength, and the second bevel,
which could be called a clearance bevel as it gives clearance from the
surface giving greater manoeuvrability. This to me makes most sense, so I
will be giving it a try shortly.


Watch your regrinds. A long bevel planes shallow, a short bevel turns
corners, and a secondary bevel may just provide another heel to bruise the
work. It can also complicate your entry poke.

Entry peel, George... Now that you've made me a "Peel don't poke" convert, don't
change religions on me.. ;~]


mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

"mac davis" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 20:14:56 GMT, "George" wrote:


"John" wrote in message
...
In message
,

Fred,

After reading yours, and the other posts I think you have hit the nail
on
the head, with the use of 2 bevels. The cutting bevel means that the
tool
cutting edge has body behind it giving strength, and the second bevel,
which could be called a clearance bevel as it gives clearance from the
surface giving greater manoeuvrability. This to me makes most sense, so
I
will be giving it a try shortly.


Watch your regrinds. A long bevel planes shallow, a short bevel turns
corners, and a secondary bevel may just provide another heel to bruise the
work. It can also complicate your entry poke.

Entry peel, George... Now that you've made me a "Peel don't poke" convert,
don't
change religions on me.. ;~]


Yer getting things confused Mac. F'rinstance I never advocated "riding,"
but "guiding" bevels, and you still have to poke across to get behind and
peel. As a mnemonic, "every stroke starts with a poke" works.

I remember long disagreements with Mangimelli over the business of parallel
to edge rather than perpendicular as a bevel reference.

On Mar 19, 1:53 pm, "Bob Daun" wrote:
Enjoyed all of the "riding the bevel" things. One thing that I see very
little discussion of (and I am primarily talking about doing small bowls 12
inch diameter or less) is the typical speeds that people use for the various
operations. For example on my Jet 1442 when roughing a bowl, I work at the
slowest speed until the exterior is round (450RPM). As the turning gets
easier and everything comes into balance I find that I do most of my work
around 1200 RPM or so. If I have end grain "fuzzies" on the surface, I have
taken the speed up to 2000 RPM and use a very light touch with a freshly
honed gouge. I would just like to hear peoples thoughts on this.

"Gerald Ross" wrote in message

. ..

John wrote:
In message , mac davis
writes
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 22:20:30 GMT, John
wrote:
You got some great answers, John, and I learned form your post, so thanks
for
bringing it up..
Hell, I've been trying to ride the whole damn bevel for years, since
George
advised me too.. Now that I know what the term really means, I realize
that I'm
actually doing it right when I don't "ride the bevel"..lol

Mac, I wonder how many people never ride the bevel, just present the tool
and cut ?

I know I am probably taking a risk, but I so often find I just present
the tool at the exact angle needed and get on with it, its almost like an
inbuilt instinct for what is right. I almost have to consciously force
the tool to ride the bevel before contact. I keep saying to myself I must
do better , but it hasn't worked yet

A good example is a winged object where you spend most of the time
turning air, riding the bevel isn't easy, just slowly presenting the tool

Maybe this is why I was able to create captive rings within my first few
hours of turning back in September, and not doing one till last weekend I
created a captive ring only 1/2 inch diameter on a 1 1/2 inch tall
goblet.

I used it as a learning tool, and for safety, when I first started
turning. Now it is automatic to use the tool at the correct angle and I
don't have to slide down the bevel until it starts cutting.

--
Gerald Ross
Cochran, GA

I've got a mind like a.. a.. what's
that thing called?


Hello Bob,

My normal rule of thumb for lathe speed it to increase the speed until
it vibrates a bit and then back it off until the vibration goes away.
That often makes the speed fairly low for an out of balance piece of
turning and as you say you can speed it up as it comes into balance.
The basic rule put out by Dale Nish in one of his books was this: The
diameter of the workpiece in inches times the speed of the lathe
should be between 6000 and 9000. For example the low end on a 12 inch
bowl would be 500 rpm and the high end would be 750 rpm. This was
stated for a safe speed. A 12 inch bowl rotating at 2000 rpm is very
dangerous and I highly recommend sharpening your gouge rather than
increasing the speed to that high. Another thing that often eliminates
fuzzies is to step down in the size of the tool. If a 1/2" bowl gouge
is leaving fuzzies, try a 3/8" bowl gouge. If that still leaves
fuzzies, try steppind down to a 1/4" bowl gouge. All of this without
increasing the lathe speed outside of the recommended range.

If you were turning spindles (like pens) with a 1/2 inch diameter you
could supposedly safely turn them at speed between 12,000 rpm and
18,000 rpm. Unfortunately, most lathes will not go higher than about
3,000 rpm so one cannot turn in that speed range.

Fred Holder
http://www.morewoodturning.net

On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 14:52:16 -0700 (PDT), Fred Holder
wrote:


Hello Bob,

My normal rule of thumb for lathe speed it to increase the speed until
it vibrates a bit and then back it off until the vibration goes away.
That often makes the speed fairly low for an out of balance piece of
turning and as you say you can speed it up as it comes into balance.
The basic rule put out by Dale Nish in one of his books was this: The
diameter of the workpiece in inches times the speed of the lathe
should be between 6000 and 9000. For example the low end on a 12 inch
bowl would be 500 rpm and the high end would be 750 rpm. This was
stated for a safe speed. A 12 inch bowl rotating at 2000 rpm is very
dangerous and I highly recommend sharpening your gouge rather than
increasing the speed to that high. Another thing that often eliminates
fuzzies is to step down in the size of the tool. If a 1/2" bowl gouge
is leaving fuzzies, try a 3/8" bowl gouge. If that still leaves
fuzzies, try steppind down to a 1/4" bowl gouge. All of this without
increasing the lathe speed outside of the recommended range.

If you were turning spindles (like pens) with a 1/2 inch diameter you
could supposedly safely turn them at speed between 12,000 rpm and
18,000 rpm. Unfortunately, most lathes will not go higher than about
3,000 rpm so one cannot turn in that speed range.

Fred Holder
http://www.morewoodturning.net

I follow Bill Grumbine's method... Turn at a speed that's comfortable for you
and for the lathe/wood..
Pretty simple, but I guess I am too... ;-]


mac

Please remove splinters before emailing