wrote in
:


I don't think the issue is tooth marks (there shouldn't be any). The
issue is the "polished surface". The glue has to have something to
bite into. A polished surface doesn't work. Try using Titebond on
glass.

How strong is a wood glue joint if both pieces have been shellaced first?
I wonder if the wood glue causes a slight swelling in doing its magic.

Puckdropper
--
http://www.puckdroppersplace.us/rec.woodworking
A mini archive of some of rec.woodworking's best and worst!

On 1/14/18 10:00 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 10:35:01 PM UTC-5, whit3rd wrote:
On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 6:22:14 PM UTC-8, DerbyDad03 wrote:

Bottom line: Are you saying that the surfaces created by a straight router
bit on the edges of two 1 x poplar boards is too smooth for Titebond III
to perform its designed task?f

Yes, there may be something to that. A blunt (carbide) bit both cuts and slightly
crushes the wood as it passes. That crushing closes the ends of the wood
fiber, and makes glues less effective.

In my case, it's a brand new Whiteside bit. Right out the case and into the "jointer"/router.


For high quality veneering (and plywood) the surface quality from an
acute (low-angle) plane, or from light sanding, is preferred for glue
bond. D-day gliders, manufactured in quantity, were all sandpapered
before assembly and glue-up.

Titebond recommends acetone wipe for oily woods, and
" A good bonding surface can also be achieved by sanding or planing the wood just before gluing the joints."
but there's no harm applying the same advice to poplar.

They also say, regarding oily woods (which I don't believe poplar to be):

"For either type of wood, planing, jointing, or sanding shortly before bonding will remove the
contaminating layer and allow successful bonding." The use of acetone says "otherwise"
meaning if not jointed shortly before bonding.

I'm sure my router jointed edges are going to be just fine.


GEEZ! Poplar is not oily. Just get out of here and glue up your panels.
Man, the old wives' tales have been coming back around this groups for
decades.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
www.mikedrums.com

On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 10:50:52 PM UTC-5, -MIKE- wrote:
On 1/14/18 9:16 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 9:41:58 PM UTC-5, -MIKE- wrote:
On 1/14/18 8:22 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 6:53:14 PM UTC-5,
wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 14:27:10 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 5:03:30 PM UTC-5,
wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 12:44:52 -0600, -MIKE-
wrote:

On 1/14/18 11:02 AM, Leon wrote:
My table saw leaves a very clean edge, but my
router table leaves a edge that is buttery
smooth.

Not the best for a glue up.

I wondered about that as well. A really smooth
surface won't soak up the glue as well and you could
squeeze out too much when clamping.


There is a lot of back and forth on this. Typical
yellow/wood glue is not a good gap filler and works
best with a minimum of product in the joint. Tooth
marks create gaps. Additionally there is a lot of back
and forth talk on starving a joint by squeezing glue
out of it. Glue starvation as it is often called is
when there is no or not enough glue on the surface to
begin with not because you had squeeze out. You get
squeeze out because there was too much glue in the
joint to begin with. If you don't get squeeze out you
have no indicator that the joint is tight. I have never
had a joint fail because of too much clamping pressure
and causing too much glue to squeeze out. Remember, a
quality glue joint line is one that is almost
invisible.

Yeah, there are a lot of old wives' tales in woodworking
and those are three of them. Glue doesn't "bite" and
holds perfectly fine to "buttery smooth" surface.

Try it with glass.

Apples and Gorillas

No, it really isn't. It's a mechanical connection.

OK, let's stop arguing about stuff that doesn't matter to this
thread and get back to the actual issue.

Bottom line: Are you saying that the surfaces created by a
straight router bit on the edges of two 1 x poplar boards is too
smooth for Titebond III to perform its designed task?


I don't know what he's saying, but I'll say no. Some advice,
though. You'd be amazed at how much smoother (smaller "bumps") a
surface you get with a larger diameter bit at a higher speed and
slower feed rate with the stock.

I suppose someone could do the math, but I'm sure you can picture
that the larger the diameter of the cutter head, the larger the
radius of the cut, meaning fewer and smoother "bumps."

In ANY case! Many times, when using a jointer (JOINER!, nor
wait! JOINTER! No, no, it's joinyerterner!) or router, I am often
in the habit of "planing" the edge surfaces with light passes of
100-120 grit with a hard surface sanding pad (block of wood) if I'm
dissatisfied with the smoothness of the surface.

I RARELY do that when said surfaces are to be glued together. And
have never done so when using the table saw and rip blade to prep
the boards to be glued together.


I'm making 2 panels from 1 x stock. Each will have 2 seams. Each will
see more or less the same use/abuse since they will both be used as
tops for the base cabinets for the bookcase project. (similar to
yours)

I already glued up one panel with boards jointed with a 24 tooth rip
blade.

I then figured out what I was doing wrong with my hands and jointed 3
other boards with a 1/2" straight bit on my router table. I'll be
gluing up that panel tomorrow.

I will mark the underside of each panel as to the jointing method
used. I will do my best to remember to revive this thread if either
of the panels fail during my lifetime.

By that time I'll probably be able to post a hologram version of the
failed joint image that I'll create with the MRI machine that I'll
build with my 3D printer array.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izQB2-Kmiic


Haha! Please don't pay too much attention to the people trying to make
rocket surgery out of this.
IIRC, you were joining two 9" wide boards to make 18", correct?
If I were worried about anything, I would be worried about cupping on
those panels.
I would rather join four 4.5" boards than two 9" ones.


Two 7.5" and one 5.5" board to be trimmed down to ~18". But, and this is
a big but...

Here is a close up of one of the 7.25" boards:

https://i.imgur.com/YLE37pH.jpg

The boards are already edge glued, consisting of random 3/4" to ~2" strips.

A local lumber yard carries them as "paint grade" boards, at a much lower
cost than clear poplar. They are dead flat and the joints are so tight the
only way that they are visible is because of the change in grain.

I spoke to a couple of contractors that frequent the lumber yard and they
can't say enough good things about these boards. We'll see.

On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 11:09:05 PM UTC-5, -MIKE- wrote:
On 1/14/18 10:00 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 10:35:01 PM UTC-5, whit3rd wrote:
On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 6:22:14 PM UTC-8, DerbyDad03 wrote:

Bottom line: Are you saying that the surfaces created by a straight router
bit on the edges of two 1 x poplar boards is too smooth for Titebond III
to perform its designed task?f

Yes, there may be something to that. A blunt (carbide) bit both cuts and slightly
crushes the wood as it passes. That crushing closes the ends of the wood
fiber, and makes glues less effective.

In my case, it's a brand new Whiteside bit. Right out the case and into the "jointer"/router.


For high quality veneering (and plywood) the surface quality from an
acute (low-angle) plane, or from light sanding, is preferred for glue
bond. D-day gliders, manufactured in quantity, were all sandpapered
before assembly and glue-up.

Titebond recommends acetone wipe for oily woods, and
" A good bonding surface can also be achieved by sanding or planing the wood just before gluing the joints."
but there's no harm applying the same advice to poplar.

They also say, regarding oily woods (which I don't believe poplar to be):

"For either type of wood, planing, jointing, or sanding shortly before bonding will remove the
contaminating layer and allow successful bonding." The use of acetone says "otherwise"
meaning if not jointed shortly before bonding.

I'm sure my router jointed edges are going to be just fine.


GEEZ! Poplar is not oily.

I was trying to be nice. ;-)

Just get out of here and glue up your panels.

One down, one to go. MLK Day will be WW Day. I hope to get the face frames
done and to start working on the doors.

Man, the old wives' tales have been coming back around this groups for
decades.

On 1/14/18 10:28 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 10:50:52 PM UTC-5, -MIKE- wrote:
On 1/14/18 9:16 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 9:41:58 PM UTC-5, -MIKE- wrote:
On 1/14/18 8:22 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 6:53:14 PM UTC-5,
wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 14:27:10 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 5:03:30 PM UTC-5,
wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 12:44:52 -0600, -MIKE-
wrote:

On 1/14/18 11:02 AM, Leon wrote:
My table saw leaves a very clean edge, but
my router table leaves a edge that is
buttery smooth.

Not the best for a glue up.

I wondered about that as well. A really smooth
surface won't soak up the glue as well and you
could squeeze out too much when clamping.


There is a lot of back and forth on this. Typical
yellow/wood glue is not a good gap filler and
works best with a minimum of product in the joint.
Tooth marks create gaps. Additionally there is a
lot of back and forth talk on starving a joint by
squeezing glue out of it. Glue starvation as it is
often called is when there is no or not enough glue
on the surface to begin with not because you had
squeeze out. You get squeeze out because there was
too much glue in the joint to begin with. If you
don't get squeeze out you have no indicator that
the joint is tight. I have never had a joint fail
because of too much clamping pressure and causing
too much glue to squeeze out. Remember, a quality
glue joint line is one that is almost invisible.

Yeah, there are a lot of old wives' tales in
woodworking and those are three of them. Glue doesn't
"bite" and holds perfectly fine to "buttery smooth"
surface.

Try it with glass.

Apples and Gorillas

No, it really isn't. It's a mechanical connection.

OK, let's stop arguing about stuff that doesn't matter to
this thread and get back to the actual issue.

Bottom line: Are you saying that the surfaces created by a
straight router bit on the edges of two 1 x poplar boards is
too smooth for Titebond III to perform its designed task?


I don't know what he's saying, but I'll say no. Some advice,
though. You'd be amazed at how much smoother (smaller "bumps")
a surface you get with a larger diameter bit at a higher speed
and slower feed rate with the stock.

I suppose someone could do the math, but I'm sure you can
picture that the larger the diameter of the cutter head, the
larger the radius of the cut, meaning fewer and smoother
"bumps."

In ANY case! Many times, when using a jointer (JOINER!, nor
wait! JOINTER! No, no, it's joinyerterner!) or router, I am
often in the habit of "planing" the edge surfaces with light
passes of 100-120 grit with a hard surface sanding pad (block
of wood) if I'm dissatisfied with the smoothness of the
surface.

I RARELY do that when said surfaces are to be glued together.
And have never done so when using the table saw and rip blade
to prep the boards to be glued together.


I'm making 2 panels from 1 x stock. Each will have 2 seams. Each
will see more or less the same use/abuse since they will both be
used as tops for the base cabinets for the bookcase project.
(similar to yours)

I already glued up one panel with boards jointed with a 24 tooth
rip blade.

I then figured out what I was doing wrong with my hands and
jointed 3 other boards with a 1/2" straight bit on my router
table. I'll be gluing up that panel tomorrow.

I will mark the underside of each panel as to the jointing
method used. I will do my best to remember to revive this thread
if either of the panels fail during my lifetime.

By that time I'll probably be able to post a hologram version of
the failed joint image that I'll create with the MRI machine that
I'll build with my 3D printer array.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izQB2-Kmiic


Haha! Please don't pay too much attention to the people trying to
make rocket surgery out of this. IIRC, you were joining two 9" wide
boards to make 18", correct? If I were worried about anything, I
would be worried about cupping on those panels. I would rather join
four 4.5" boards than two 9" ones.


Two 7.5" and one 5.5" board to be trimmed down to ~18". But, and this
is a big but...

Here is a close up of one of the 7.25" boards:

https://i.imgur.com/YLE37pH.jpg

The boards are already edge glued, consisting of random 3/4" to ~2"
strips.

A local lumber yard carries them as "paint grade" boards, at a much
lower cost than clear poplar. They are dead flat and the joints are
so tight the only way that they are visible is because of the change
in grain.

I spoke to a couple of contractors that frequent the lumber yard and
they can't say enough good things about these boards. We'll see.


PFFT! Well, then we're already talking about glued up panels.
Nothing to worry about. I used a bunch of those in pine a couple days
ago and I use them all the time for wide shelf panels. I love them.
They are very stable and a good way to save time.

My only advice would be to try to rip them to size at the glue joints if
possible to maintain a consistent width in the laminated boards.

Color variations aside (hard to avoid with poplar) those all look like
nice, straight grained segments. You should have great results.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
www.mikedrums.com

On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 11:34:39 PM UTC-5, -MIKE- wrote:
On 1/14/18 10:28 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 10:50:52 PM UTC-5, -MIKE- wrote:
On 1/14/18 9:16 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 9:41:58 PM UTC-5, -MIKE- wrote:
On 1/14/18 8:22 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 6:53:14 PM UTC-5,
wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 14:27:10 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 5:03:30 PM UTC-5,
wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 12:44:52 -0600, -MIKE-
wrote:

On 1/14/18 11:02 AM, Leon wrote:
My table saw leaves a very clean edge, but
my router table leaves a edge that is
buttery smooth.

Not the best for a glue up.

I wondered about that as well. A really smooth
surface won't soak up the glue as well and you
could squeeze out too much when clamping.


There is a lot of back and forth on this. Typical
yellow/wood glue is not a good gap filler and
works best with a minimum of product in the joint.
Tooth marks create gaps. Additionally there is a
lot of back and forth talk on starving a joint by
squeezing glue out of it. Glue starvation as it is
often called is when there is no or not enough glue
on the surface to begin with not because you had
squeeze out. You get squeeze out because there was
too much glue in the joint to begin with. If you
don't get squeeze out you have no indicator that
the joint is tight. I have never had a joint fail
because of too much clamping pressure and causing
too much glue to squeeze out. Remember, a quality
glue joint line is one that is almost invisible.

Yeah, there are a lot of old wives' tales in
woodworking and those are three of them. Glue doesn't
"bite" and holds perfectly fine to "buttery smooth"
surface.

Try it with glass.

Apples and Gorillas

No, it really isn't. It's a mechanical connection.

OK, let's stop arguing about stuff that doesn't matter to
this thread and get back to the actual issue.

Bottom line: Are you saying that the surfaces created by a
straight router bit on the edges of two 1 x poplar boards is
too smooth for Titebond III to perform its designed task?


I don't know what he's saying, but I'll say no. Some advice,
though. You'd be amazed at how much smoother (smaller "bumps")
a surface you get with a larger diameter bit at a higher speed
and slower feed rate with the stock.

I suppose someone could do the math, but I'm sure you can
picture that the larger the diameter of the cutter head, the
larger the radius of the cut, meaning fewer and smoother
"bumps."

In ANY case! Many times, when using a jointer (JOINER!, nor
wait! JOINTER! No, no, it's joinyerterner!) or router, I am
often in the habit of "planing" the edge surfaces with light
passes of 100-120 grit with a hard surface sanding pad (block
of wood) if I'm dissatisfied with the smoothness of the
surface.

I RARELY do that when said surfaces are to be glued together.
And have never done so when using the table saw and rip blade
to prep the boards to be glued together.


I'm making 2 panels from 1 x stock. Each will have 2 seams. Each
will see more or less the same use/abuse since they will both be
used as tops for the base cabinets for the bookcase project.
(similar to yours)

I already glued up one panel with boards jointed with a 24 tooth
rip blade.

I then figured out what I was doing wrong with my hands and
jointed 3 other boards with a 1/2" straight bit on my router
table. I'll be gluing up that panel tomorrow.

I will mark the underside of each panel as to the jointing
method used. I will do my best to remember to revive this thread
if either of the panels fail during my lifetime.

By that time I'll probably be able to post a hologram version of
the failed joint image that I'll create with the MRI machine that
I'll build with my 3D printer array.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izQB2-Kmiic


Haha! Please don't pay too much attention to the people trying to
make rocket surgery out of this. IIRC, you were joining two 9" wide
boards to make 18", correct? If I were worried about anything, I
would be worried about cupping on those panels. I would rather join
four 4.5" boards than two 9" ones.


Two 7.5" and one 5.5" board to be trimmed down to ~18". But, and this
is a big but...

Here is a close up of one of the 7.25" boards:

https://i.imgur.com/YLE37pH.jpg

The boards are already edge glued, consisting of random 3/4" to ~2"
strips.

A local lumber yard carries them as "paint grade" boards, at a much
lower cost than clear poplar. They are dead flat and the joints are
so tight the only way that they are visible is because of the change
in grain.

I spoke to a couple of contractors that frequent the lumber yard and
they can't say enough good things about these boards. We'll see.


PFFT! Well, then we're already talking about glued up panels.
Nothing to worry about. I used a bunch of those in pine a couple days
ago and I use them all the time for wide shelf panels. I love them.
They are very stable and a good way to save time.


Actually, what started me down this jointing and gluing path was the POS
pine panel that I bought at Lowes last week.

I think this is what I bought but it was shrink wrapped. (I tossed the
packaging and can't find the receipt right now.)

https://www.lowes.com/pd/Common-3-4-...Board/50053137

It seemed to be perfectly flat in the store, but once I cross cut it in
half, it warped so fast I could almost watch it bend. ;-)

By the next morning one piece rocked diagonally corner to corner and
when I put the 2 halves face to face there's an ~3/32 gap at the center
of the 20" width. They look like this: ()

If Lowe's won't take it back with just the receipt, I've got $32 worth of
"quick burn" material for the fire pit.

On 1/14/18 11:13 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 11:34:39 PM UTC-5, -MIKE- wrote:
On 1/14/18 10:28 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 10:50:52 PM UTC-5, -MIKE- wrote:
On 1/14/18 9:16 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 9:41:58 PM UTC-5, -MIKE- wrote:
On 1/14/18 8:22 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 6:53:14 PM UTC-5,
wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 14:27:10 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 5:03:30 PM UTC-5,
wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 12:44:52 -0600, -MIKE-
wrote:

On 1/14/18 11:02 AM, Leon wrote:
My table saw leaves a very clean edge, but
my router table leaves a edge that is
buttery smooth.

Not the best for a glue up.

I wondered about that as well. A really smooth
surface won't soak up the glue as well and you
could squeeze out too much when clamping.


There is a lot of back and forth on this. Typical
yellow/wood glue is not a good gap filler and
works best with a minimum of product in the joint.
Tooth marks create gaps. Additionally there is a
lot of back and forth talk on starving a joint by
squeezing glue out of it. Glue starvation as it is
often called is when there is no or not enough glue
on the surface to begin with not because you had
squeeze out. You get squeeze out because there was
too much glue in the joint to begin with. If you
don't get squeeze out you have no indicator that
the joint is tight. I have never had a joint fail
because of too much clamping pressure and causing
too much glue to squeeze out. Remember, a quality
glue joint line is one that is almost invisible.

Yeah, there are a lot of old wives' tales in
woodworking and those are three of them. Glue doesn't
"bite" and holds perfectly fine to "buttery smooth"
surface.

Try it with glass.

Apples and Gorillas

No, it really isn't. It's a mechanical connection.

OK, let's stop arguing about stuff that doesn't matter to
this thread and get back to the actual issue.

Bottom line: Are you saying that the surfaces created by a
straight router bit on the edges of two 1 x poplar boards is
too smooth for Titebond III to perform its designed task?


I don't know what he's saying, but I'll say no. Some advice,
though. You'd be amazed at how much smoother (smaller "bumps")
a surface you get with a larger diameter bit at a higher speed
and slower feed rate with the stock.

I suppose someone could do the math, but I'm sure you can
picture that the larger the diameter of the cutter head, the
larger the radius of the cut, meaning fewer and smoother
"bumps."

In ANY case! Many times, when using a jointer (JOINER!, nor
wait! JOINTER! No, no, it's joinyerterner!) or router, I am
often in the habit of "planing" the edge surfaces with light
passes of 100-120 grit with a hard surface sanding pad (block
of wood) if I'm dissatisfied with the smoothness of the
surface.

I RARELY do that when said surfaces are to be glued together.
And have never done so when using the table saw and rip blade
to prep the boards to be glued together.


I'm making 2 panels from 1 x stock. Each will have 2 seams. Each
will see more or less the same use/abuse since they will both be
used as tops for the base cabinets for the bookcase project.
(similar to yours)

I already glued up one panel with boards jointed with a 24 tooth
rip blade.

I then figured out what I was doing wrong with my hands and
jointed 3 other boards with a 1/2" straight bit on my router
table. I'll be gluing up that panel tomorrow.

I will mark the underside of each panel as to the jointing
method used. I will do my best to remember to revive this thread
if either of the panels fail during my lifetime.

By that time I'll probably be able to post a hologram version of
the failed joint image that I'll create with the MRI machine that
I'll build with my 3D printer array.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izQB2-Kmiic


Haha! Please don't pay too much attention to the people trying to
make rocket surgery out of this. IIRC, you were joining two 9" wide
boards to make 18", correct? If I were worried about anything, I
would be worried about cupping on those panels. I would rather join
four 4.5" boards than two 9" ones.


Two 7.5" and one 5.5" board to be trimmed down to ~18". But, and this
is a big but...

Here is a close up of one of the 7.25" boards:

https://i.imgur.com/YLE37pH.jpg

The boards are already edge glued, consisting of random 3/4" to ~2"
strips.

A local lumber yard carries them as "paint grade" boards, at a much
lower cost than clear poplar. They are dead flat and the joints are
so tight the only way that they are visible is because of the change
in grain.

I spoke to a couple of contractors that frequent the lumber yard and
they can't say enough good things about these boards. We'll see.


PFFT! Well, then we're already talking about glued up panels.
Nothing to worry about. I used a bunch of those in pine a couple days
ago and I use them all the time for wide shelf panels. I love them.
They are very stable and a good way to save time.


Actually, what started me down this jointing and gluing path was the POS
pine panel that I bought at Lowes last week.

I think this is what I bought but it was shrink wrapped. (I tossed the
packaging and can't find the receipt right now.)

https://www.lowes.com/pd/Common-3-4-...Board/50053137

It seemed to be perfectly flat in the store, but once I cross cut it in
half, it warped so fast I could almost watch it bend. ;-)

By the next morning one piece rocked diagonally corner to corner and
when I put the 2 halves face to face there's an ~3/32 gap at the center
of the 20" width. They look like this: ()

If Lowe's won't take it back with just the receipt, I've got $32 worth of
"quick burn" material for the fire pit.


When I buy them, I always check the ends at the end grain to see if they
are alternated, grain-wise.
Most of those are made in Brazil in factories that don't have the most
skilled laborers.
So it's worth it to make sure the grain patterns are alternating on each
and every laminated board.

Oh, and Lowes will take back just about anything... even if it's just
for store credit.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
www.mikedrums.com

On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 04:04:35 GMT, Puckdropper
wrote:

wrote in
:


I don't think the issue is tooth marks (there shouldn't be any). The
issue is the "polished surface". The glue has to have something to
bite into. A polished surface doesn't work. Try using Titebond on
glass.

How strong is a wood glue joint if both pieces have been shellaced first?
I wonder if the wood glue causes a slight swelling in doing its magic.

Probably not strong at all. Now you have two bonds--the
shellac-to-wood bond and the glue-to-shellac bond.

Puckdropper

"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
...
On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 1:56:44 PM UTC-5, dadiOH wrote:

There is no need to, left hand holds the work against the outfeed
fence, right hand moves it along. Now, if the work were much more than
36"
long, you would have to move your right hand but not your left; no
matter,
left is still holding it where it should be.

I just changed my feed method and hand positions. I did not change my
fences.
I was able to joint a 36" board without any bumps.

I was previously holding the board down and against fence with both hands
on the out-feed side. Even tried paddles. This time, partially based on
your wording, I installed a feather board to hold the board down and
placed
my left hand on the table, keeping pressure on outside edge of the board
to
hold it against the out-feed table while moving it with my right.
Perfectly
jointed edge.

YAY!. As a refinement, you don't need the featherboard, your left hand can
easily hold it both in and down.

There remains the reason behind your bumps. Even holding it as you
described, there should have been none. For a bump to arise, the board has
to have slightly moved away from the bit, then moved laterally, then
returned to the bit. The simplest explanation is that there was a fulcrum;
ie, the fence halves were not parallel.The other explanation is that you
were physically moving the work to create the bump. In either case, I'd
think the problem would be immediately obvious. Why wasn't it?

On Monday, January 15, 2018 at 8:28:15 AM UTC-5, dadiOH wrote:
"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
...
On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 1:56:44 PM UTC-5, dadiOH wrote:

There is no need to, left hand holds the work against the outfeed
fence, right hand moves it along. Now, if the work were much more than
36"
long, you would have to move your right hand but not your left; no
matter,
left is still holding it where it should be.

I just changed my feed method and hand positions. I did not change my
fences.
I was able to joint a 36" board without any bumps.

I was previously holding the board down and against fence with both hands
on the out-feed side. Even tried paddles. This time, partially based on
your wording, I installed a feather board to hold the board down and
placed
my left hand on the table, keeping pressure on outside edge of the board
to
hold it against the out-feed table while moving it with my right.
Perfectly
jointed edge.

YAY!. As a refinement, you don't need the featherboard, your left hand can
easily hold it both in and down.

Belt and suspenders. Easily attached, provides peace of mind.


There remains the reason behind your bumps. Even holding it as you
described, there should have been none. For a bump to arise, the board has
to have slightly moved away from the bit, then moved laterally, then
returned to the bit.

Exactly - as previously stated very early in this thread.

The simplest explanation is that there was a fulcrum;
ie, the fence halves were not parallel.

I'm not sure why you keep going back to the fences. In the post you just
responded to I stated that I did not have to adjust the fences to eliminate
the bumps. It was all caused by improper hand positioning.

The other explanation is that you
were physically moving the work to create the bump.

See your "For a bump to arise" sentence above. Also, that fact was previously
stated very early in this thread.

In either case, I'd
think the problem would be immediately obvious. Why wasn't it?

It was. Why do you think I started this thread?

"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
...
On Monday, January 15, 2018 at 8:28:15 AM UTC-5, dadiOH wrote:
"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
...
On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 1:56:44 PM UTC-5, dadiOH wrote:

There is no need to, left hand holds the work against the outfeed
fence, right hand moves it along. Now, if the work were much more
than
36"
long, you would have to move your right hand but not your left; no
matter,
left is still holding it where it should be.

I just changed my feed method and hand positions. I did not change my
fences.
I was able to joint a 36" board without any bumps.

I was previously holding the board down and against fence with both
hands
on the out-feed side. Even tried paddles. This time, partially based on
your wording, I installed a feather board to hold the board down and
placed
my left hand on the table, keeping pressure on outside edge of the
board
to
hold it against the out-feed table while moving it with my right.
Perfectly
jointed edge.

YAY!. As a refinement, you don't need the featherboard, your left hand
can
easily hold it both in and down.

Belt and suspenders. Easily attached, provides peace of mind.


There remains the reason behind your bumps. Even holding it as you
described, there should have been none. For a bump to arise, the board
has
to have slightly moved away from the bit, then moved laterally, then
returned to the bit.

Exactly - as previously stated very early in this thread.

The simplest explanation is that there was a fulcrum;
ie, the fence halves were not parallel.

I'm not sure why you keep going back to the fences. In the post you just
responded to I stated that I did not have to adjust the fences to
eliminate
the bumps. It was all caused by improper hand positioning.

Because if the fences were parallel and you kept the work against the fence
when changing hands you should not have made a bump. If they were NOT
parallel there would be a fulcrum; if you applied greater/lesser pressure
toward the fence on the work piece on one side or the other of the fulcrum,
you'd get a bump; if you applied pressure correctly, no bump even if the
fences were less than parallel.

IOW, holding as you did should not cause a bump.

The other explanation is that you
were physically moving the work to create the bump.

See your "For a bump to arise" sentence above. Also, that fact was
previously
stated very early in this thread.

In either case, I'd
think the problem would be immediately obvious. Why wasn't it?

It was. Why do you think I started this thread?

I should have said, "In either case, I'd think the SOLUTION would be
immediately obvious."

On 1/15/2018 10:16 AM, dadiOH wrote:
f the fences were parallel and you kept the work against the fence
when changing hands you should not have made a bump. If they were NOT
Assuming the fences are positioned correctly, and the pressure is
corrrect whether held to the fence manually or with feather boards,
there may be a speed factor. If you move the piece through the bit too
fast, as the densities of the wood change ie knots, the bumps may be
created as the piece moves away from the fence as the bit cuts around
the denser wood.

I know I have problems with bumps because of unknown knots in the wood.
--
2017: The year we learn to play the great game of Euchre

On Monday, January 15, 2018 at 10:16:23 AM UTC-5, dadiOH wrote:
"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
...
On Monday, January 15, 2018 at 8:28:15 AM UTC-5, dadiOH wrote:
"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
...
On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 1:56:44 PM UTC-5, dadiOH wrote:

There is no need to, left hand holds the work against the outfeed
fence, right hand moves it along. Now, if the work were much more
than
36"
long, you would have to move your right hand but not your left; no
matter,
left is still holding it where it should be.

I just changed my feed method and hand positions. I did not change my
fences.
I was able to joint a 36" board without any bumps.

I was previously holding the board down and against fence with both
hands
on the out-feed side. Even tried paddles. This time, partially based on
your wording, I installed a feather board to hold the board down and
placed
my left hand on the table, keeping pressure on outside edge of the
board
to
hold it against the out-feed table while moving it with my right.
Perfectly
jointed edge.

YAY!. As a refinement, you don't need the featherboard, your left hand
can
easily hold it both in and down.

Belt and suspenders. Easily attached, provides peace of mind.


There remains the reason behind your bumps. Even holding it as you
described, there should have been none. For a bump to arise, the board
has
to have slightly moved away from the bit, then moved laterally, then
returned to the bit.

Exactly - as previously stated very early in this thread.

The simplest explanation is that there was a fulcrum;
ie, the fence halves were not parallel.

I'm not sure why you keep going back to the fences. In the post you just
responded to I stated that I did not have to adjust the fences to
eliminate
the bumps. It was all caused by improper hand positioning.

Because if the fences were parallel and you kept the work against the fence
when changing hands you should not have made a bump. If they were NOT
parallel there would be a fulcrum; if you applied greater/lesser pressure
toward the fence on the work piece on one side or the other of the fulcrum,
you'd get a bump; if you applied pressure correctly, no bump even if the
fences were less than parallel.

IOW, holding as you did should not cause a bump.

Do you know how I was holding it when the bumps were created vs. how I
modified the holding process?

It should be painfully obvious by now that fences are/were fine based on the
fact that I have repeatedly said (and if I ever wanted to post in all caps,
this would be the time) I am now able to get a perfectly jointed edge without
ever having changed the positioning of the fences.

If the fences were part of the problem I seriously doubt that I would have
been able to eliminate the bumps simply my changing the feed method/hand
positions.

Please stop bringing the fences into this situation. I'm not saying that a
fence mis-alignment wouldn't cause this problem, I'm saying that the fences
(imagine all caps again) were not a factor in this specific case.


The other explanation is that you
were physically moving the work to create the bump.

See your "For a bump to arise" sentence above. Also, that fact was
previously
stated very early in this thread.

In either case, I'd
think the problem would be immediately obvious. Why wasn't it?

It was. Why do you think I started this thread?

I should have said, "In either case, I'd think the SOLUTION would be
immediately obvious."

On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 18:22:08 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 6:53:14 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 14:27:10 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 5:03:30 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 12:44:52 -0600, -MIKE-
wrote:

On 1/14/18 11:02 AM, Leon wrote:
My table saw leaves a very clean edge, but my router table
leaves a edge that is buttery smooth.

Not the best for a glue up.

I wondered about that as well. A really smooth surface won't soak
up the glue as well and you could squeeze out too much when
clamping.


There is a lot of back and forth on this. Typical yellow/wood glue
is not a good gap filler and works best with a minimum of product in
the joint. Tooth marks create gaps. Additionally there is a lot of
back and forth talk on starving a joint by squeezing glue out of it.
Glue starvation as it is often called is when there is no or not
enough glue on the surface to begin with not because you had squeeze
out. You get squeeze out because there was too much glue in the
joint to begin with. If you don't get squeeze out you have no
indicator that the joint is tight. I have never had a joint fail
because of too much clamping pressure and causing too much glue to
squeeze out. Remember, a quality glue joint line is one that is
almost invisible.

Yeah, there are a lot of old wives' tales in woodworking and those are
three of them.
Glue doesn't "bite" and holds perfectly fine to "buttery smooth" surface.

Try it with glass.

Apples and Gorillas

No, it really isn't. It's a mechanical connection.

OK, let's stop arguing about stuff that doesn't matter to this thread and
get back to the actual issue.

Bottom line: Are you saying that the surfaces created by a straight router
bit on the edges of two 1 x poplar boards is too smooth for Titebond III
to perform its designed task?

Cut with a sharp tool, likely not. Scorched, perhaps.

On Monday, January 15, 2018 at 8:46:38 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 18:22:08 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 6:53:14 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 14:27:10 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 5:03:30 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 12:44:52 -0600, -MIKE-
wrote:

On 1/14/18 11:02 AM, Leon wrote:
My table saw leaves a very clean edge, but my router table
leaves a edge that is buttery smooth.

Not the best for a glue up.

I wondered about that as well. A really smooth surface won't soak
up the glue as well and you could squeeze out too mucggh when
clamping.


There is a lot of back and forth on this. Typical yellow/wood glue
is not a good gap filler and works best with a minimum of product in
the joint. Tooth marks create gaps. Additionally there is a lot of
back and forth talk on starving a joint by squeezing glue out of it.
Glue starvation as it is often called is when there is no or not
enough glue on the surface to begin with not because you had squeeze
out. You get squeeze out because there was too much glue in the
joint to begin with. If you don't get squeeze out you have no
indicator that the joint is tight. I have never had a joint fail
because of too much clamping pressure and causing too much glue to
squeeze out. Remember, a quality glue joint line is one that is
almost invisible.

Yeah, there are a lot of old wives' tales in woodworking and those are
three of them.
Glue doesn't "bite" and holds perfectly fine to "buttery smooth" surface.

Try it with glass.

Apples and Gorillas

No, it really isn't. It's a mechanical connection.

OK, let's stop arguing about stuff that doesn't matter to this thread and
get back to the actual issue.

Bottom line: Are you saying that the surfaces created by a straight router
bit on the edges of two 1 x poplar boards is too smooth for Titebond III
to perform its designed task?

Cut with a sharp tool, likely not. Scorched, perhaps.

Brand new Whiteside bit, straight out of the box. Pretty darn sharp.

I'll let you know if the glue-up ever fails. ;-)