Hi,
I know I’ve never seen anyone do it either but if one wanted to try……
Obviously a rip saw would be in order. Say I was doing this with oak or walnut how many teeth would be advised? What about the set?
I’m asking as I found an antique store with a plethora of nice old hand saws mostly rip saws in good condition for less than $20.
I have a couple projects that are about 6″ x 10″ of walnut to be resawn and the band saw has only moved up to #3 on the hit parade (right behind a bigger shop<G>) so it’s by hand or not.
Any advice on how the old timers sans bandsaw did this?
Thanks,
Bro. Luke
Bro.Luke
Replies
Check this thread out. http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?t=45848&highlight=resawing I would suggest joining the Creek...awesome place.
-Ryan C.
Any advice on how the old timers sans bandsaw did this?
They used pitsaws- essentially boards like this went back to the mill. Sometimes when the boards were small, the younger guys would do this themselves. They probably used their veneering webs- 4' long frame saws with very coarse teeth.
I read that thread on sawmill creek and I think the poster made 2 mistakes. First was not choosing the coarser saw. You want the coarsest saw you can get. Second, he held the stock vertically and presumably sawed horizontally. Both of these decisions slowed the work. The finer saw choked on the saw dust and the dust had no way to get out of the kerf. Lastly, a 4" resaw isn't much of a resaw. Not sure where the line is between a normal rip in thick material and a resaw. 4" may be that line. Dunno.
I've resawed pine 1x12"'s with a hand saw. A 4' long board probably took me 20 minutes. (it was a while ago) A hand saw is really the wrong saw for the job. I recommend you use the "saw the corners out" technique if you must do this. Choose the coarsest and longest saw available to you and saw as vertically as possible to clear the kerf.
Adam
Edited 3/2/2007 7:58 am ET by AdamCherubini
I agree with Adam that, historically, a framesaw would likely have been used to saw veneer. But I disagree that veneer would necessarily have been pit sawn. I think the attached picture illustrates my point.
That's a great picture and you can see a copy of that saw in one of the Wmsburg videos. (I currently have one in work, btw). I believe that saw is called a veneer saw and its blade a veneer web. You are exactly correct that veneers were not cut by pit saws, but rather by the saw you showed. My point was that a small resaw project could be executed by this saw, without having to go to a pit operation.
Pitsaws came in both framed and open varieties , the latter being the later tools. Contrary to popular believe the man on the bottom (the pitman) has it easy. The dust falls in front of him, not generally on his head. The man on top (tillerman) must lift the saw in front of himself on each stroke. Both men steer the cut. The pitsaws I've seen can cut approx 1" per stroke in 10-12" SYP. Wmsburg carpenters make all of their framing lumber with pitsaws.
The beginning of my post on this thread paraphrases my babelfish translation of Roubo's 1760's text. (that wide lumber goes to the mill for resawing except when the work is minor and its accomplished by apprentices. If I'm not mistaken the text references the image you posted which leads me to believe they used the veneer web to resaw.
Adam
I tried it. Used a handsaw and a bowsaw. Then I bought my bandsaw. :)
Paul
I have a friend who was involved a few years ago in the construction of a nightclub in Mexico. Much of it was cast concrete. The forms were made of timbers sawn to order on the spot by a couple of guys with hand saws and big arms. You wanted a 2x8? They would cut it from a larger timber right then and there. No pit saw, no power saws.Got to tell you, boys and girls, I like hand tools and am very interested in saws and saw skills, but there comes a limit. For something like that I'd rather have a skill saw than saw skill.
I tried it once too. Also with a handsaw and a bowsaw. On a trunk section of Hazelnut (related to and looks like Birch). Then I bought a chainsaw! LOL
A few years ago I thought I would be pure and resaw by hand. After a while I realized it wasn't enough exercise or interesting enough to spend all that time on. I found it could be done, but I called Grizzly and got a bandsaw so I could spend my time doing other things I liked better than resawing by handsaw.
I've seen it done on TV. Dick Proenneke hand sawed his own boards while building his cabin in Alaska. IIRC, he states he can resaw a 5' long board by hand in about 8 minutes. You can see the video occasionally on public TV, or you can buy the video from Amazon or his family's website (Dick is gone now). It's titled 'Alone in the Wilderness'.
http://www.dickproenneke.com/alone_in_the_wilderness.html
Amazing story of a amazing man. Now understand, Dick didn't have 'big arms', in fact he looks like a smaller man. Very lean. But he makes it look easy. The video shows him hand building the cabin by himself with hand tools. I especially enjoy the part where he fashions wooden hinges by hand for his cabin door. He planned to live in the cabin by himself one year, stayed 30. He started this adventure at the age of 50. It's quite a story. I have a copy of the video and watch it about three times a year for inspiration. Check it out, you'll be glad you did...
Jeff
I've seen "Alone. . ." a couple times on our PBS station. Truly amazing. The amount of work he accomplished with simple, and in many cases homemade hand tools, is inspiring.
Hi Bro. Luke,
On Joshua Clark's web site, he has two sections that pertain. One on making a frame saw, the other concerning using it.
Making a frame saw:
http://www.hyperkitten.com/woodworking/frame_saw.php3
Using the frame saw:
http://www.hyperkitten.com/woodworking/resaw.php3
I would add to Joshua's instruction that it helps to avoid this much work to whatever degree one can. By that I mean whenever possible, resaw timber or planks which are rough cut to length. Don't resaw more length than you need to.
Ok. It's not that terrible when it is either enjoyable, a necessity, or infrequent. A frame saw does work efficiently because the saw blade is so thin and it is under tension.
On 12/4 or thicker stock, I would recommend perhaps 6 or 7 ppi, about 6 degrees of rake, filed rip. If that is a little too "strong" then add just a skosh of fleam angle, but not much. I would use a saw blade thickness of .025" for the blade and you may get by with .020" thick. Perhaps 1 1/2" to 2" wide of blade.
Make yourself a saw bench low enough you can sit on what you are sawing but not so low it interfers with your stroke length. Make a support stool for the free end as you advance the stock under you. As you get close to the end of the saw bench, simply rise up a little and slide the stock forward, sit and resume sawing.
Once you get to a certain thickness and length or if this is something you will do often and find you do not like doing it...consider breaking into the kids' piggy-bank and purchase a bandsaw. Else talk a crazy neighbor into helping you construct a pit for using a pitsaw. Make sure he is always on the bottom.
Take care, Mike
Great stuff all!The frame saw...I was looking at my old FWW Techniques books and while I haven't found anything on this subject I of course found numerous images of Tage Frid with his frame saw and started thinking in that direction, so this avenue is particularly interesting.I guess the higher tension helps...Bro. LukeBro.Luke
Hi Bro. Luke,
Not necessarily the tension in and of itself. The tension is necessary in part due to the thinness of the steel and the lack of a brass or steel back like what would be on a backsaw using the same thickness of steel.
A handsaw relies in part on its own beam strength derived from its thickness and height. A backsaw of the same height but thinner steel relies on the tension created by its back because the steel thickness to height ratio is wrong.
Think of a frame saw as a human-powered bandsaw. Really, a frame saw would be akin to a powered sash saw [a wicked piece of equipment using multiple saw bands like a gang saw].
If I get around to it this weekend and I finish the bow saw I am making myself, I'll throw together a frame saw and "demonstrate" via a few pictures of how quick one can saw 12/4 Mahogany or Walnut.
That is, unless I wisk my wife away for the weekend like I have threatened for months...
Take care, Mike
In case Bro. Luke decides to make his own frame-saw for resawing, I thought I'd piggyback on Mike Wenzloff's useful advice:"On 12/4 or thicker stock, I would recommend perhaps 6 or 7 ppi, about 6 degrees of rake, filed rip. If that is a little too "strong" then add just a skosh of fleam angle, but not much. I would use a saw blade thickness of .025" for the blade and you may get by with .020" thick. Perhaps 1 1/2" to 2" wide of blade."Since we seldom encounter saws similar to the one in the illustration which Houston Heights attached to his message (above), I thought it might be of interest to pass on the data from Holtzapffel's second volume, _Turning & Mechanical Manipulation: The Principles of Cutting Tools_, c. 1846. Needless to say, the data reflects mid-nineteenth century English convention rather than eighteenth century French usage.In the "Parallel Saws used in Frames" section of his saw chart, Holtzapffel lists the Veneer saw as having a blade length from 4 to 5 feet, a blade width of 4 to 5 inches. Also, they have from 2 to 4 points per inch (not sure this is consonant with today's "ppi" designation), and a web/blade gage of 19 to 21 (Birmingham). According to the Birmingham gage table on another page of the same volume, 19 gage is equal to .042" and 21 gage is equal to .032".Since these saws were intended for heavy use by two people for regular sawing of veneer, some of it possibly fairly wide, the information from Holtzapffel is not directly applicable to a one person frame-saw for occasional resawing. So the data obviously needs to be adjusted for the intended current use. But, I thought it might be somewhat instructive to be aware of it when considering the options. Possibly a little contrast to some of what Mike says, but I view it, mostly, as supporting his general approach.Don McConnell
Eureka Springs, AR
Thanks for the additional info, Don!
I too think if someone was building a saw especially for two people with such a long frame, the thicker plate is a must. Mainly because the tension will need to be so great, but also because two people are really going to be able to apply some pressure and "get it done" in a very effecient manner. The additional beam strength afforded by the thicker plate is necessary.
To All:I also neglected to mention that one of the best sources for your bow saw blades today isn't the soft Putsch blades. But a regular handsaw. The saw plate will be thicker. You will need to score the steel and snap it. A Dremel will do.
The scoring doesn't need to be deep, but the straighter you can guide the Dremel and a cut-off wheel then there is less work to straighten the edge. Use a belt sander to clean up the edge [oh, wear gloves when doing the above] or simply use a file and the method below to hold the steel.
Do sharpen the saw before scoring and snapping else the blade is a little harder to sharpen in some ways. But two boards of equal width in the bench vise with the gullets a tad above the boards works well. Just slower than a saw vise.
Pick a saw with the PPI desired--saves a lot of work. If you move beyons 12/4 stock into what I would consider cants or logs...do use a coarser saw. Still wouldn't use below 4 ppi [3 tpi]--and a second person to help at that. But for 12/4 a 6 ppi works well. For 8/4 a 7 ppi. For your 8/4 and less an 8 ppi is great.
Take care, Mikeoff to worky...
"Make sure he is always on the bottom". Got to be one of the most 'all acheing jobs around....
In Zimbabwe I observed on farms many teams of itinerant pit sawyers. In fact most big time old established farms had one or two pit saws on hand for use by these fellows. The better ones came fully equipped with their own saws and tools for setting and filing. They marked out the cut lines with burnt woodand string lines and it was amazing how fast they could cut a board 2 feet wide from a baulk-often of nasty woods like Blue Gum. The pit itself always seemed to require emptying of saw dust.Ofcourse they preferred wet timber and some nicer(softer) timbers like Cedrella Toona.Some of them were likely to employ counter-productive "tricks" to speed up the cut rate, such as driving wedges too much , which split the wood....
Philip Marcou
Philip,
I am digging a pit in the garden even now. The only question is, who will be my underdog? It cannot be any of the chaps I currently know as they will object both to the sawdusty hair and the low status, relatively speaking. However, I must be the top dog wherever I go as it is in my nature.
Now the matter has been considered, I will fill in the pit, before the ladywife realises I may have damage her camelia. After all, there is 3.5 HP bandsaw in the shed.
Lataxe, too modern for all that hard work.
"Low staus" would be a step up. I will volunteer as underdog, so long as you promise not to wear your woodworking kilt.Andy
Not looking up.
Hit the Home tab up in the header and if you do it soon you will see an article by Mack Headley, on 18th century pre-band saw work, and a few days before there was an article where Mack explained dimensioning lumber with hand tools.
Now, Mack has good hand skills and makes things look easy. I have seen him take a large panel saw and slice off veneer that would have to have only a very small amount of work with a plane to ready it for gluing to a substrate. (Mack is the Master of the Hay Shop at Colonial Williamsburg and one of the finest woodworkers on the planet.)
Adam Cherubini has an article in Popular Woodworking April 2007
"18th-Century Stock Preparation" with a picture of him sawing
a 5' board 2-7/8" thick. He states it took him 10 minutes to
complete. He flips the board over ever six inches to help in
keeping his cut correct.
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled