For hogging out bowls: your favorite gouge and grind??

[hockenbery]

This is a good overview of gouges

One of the benefits of AAW is the woodturning fundamentals guide to gouges by Joe Larese.

http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.woodturner.org/resource/resmgr/fundamentals/guidetogouges.pdf

Originally published in the American Woodturner October 2011

This has a good picture of the traditIonal grind and the Ellsworth grind some about their uses and a page or so on the detail gouge.

Al

 

[john lucas]

Odie All of my tools except parting tool have a secondary bevel The main bevel is usually around 1/8" on my tools. I find this gives me much more feel for the cut since it reduces the friction. And as you said lets me reach into tighter areas.

 

[robo hippy]

Well, I hadn't checked in on this thread in a few days, thought it had died....

The differences in the shall we say more traditional grind, which to me is 45/45 bevel/sweep, and the Ellsworth/swept back grind has more to do with how much edge you can put into the wood at one time without stalling your lathe.

I believe that the traditional grind does everything you want it to do.
We are in profound disagreement that it can do everything the Ellsworth grind can do.

Compared to the Ellsworth grind I find the standard grind :
does not do the flute up shear cut on the Inside of a bowl ( it can on the outside)

I have never understood the flute up cut, mostly because of how little it takes, in the hands of beginners especially, to roll over just a hair too much, you come off the bevel, and then the tool instantly turns into a scraper that is pointing up into the spin of the wood. Kablooie! This is why I always roll the flutes over to the side. That particular catch is impossible with the flutes rolled over. You get a higher shear angle, and I can't really tell any difference in the finished surface. I may have to play with it a bit more just to confirm.


does not do a pull cut well if at all

Mike Mahoney uses it quite well for pull cuts. You get a high shear angle, no, there isn't as much edge to put into the wood, but it still works well.


does not do the shear scrape

Well, it does shear scrape, but has a smaller edge to use. A scraper has more edge than either to apply for a shear scrape, with the exception of when you are on the inside of a bowl. No gouge works well for a shear scrape on the inside of a bowl. A round nose scraper or a ) nose scraper works far better and you get a much higher shear angle.

does not do the scraping

Since I am a scraper psycho, seriously, why would any one use a gouge to scrape with other than for a few brief touch ups where switching tools wouldn't really save any time. They are called scrapers for a reason...


does not do the back cut

Is this the upside down backwards cut used on boxes? I can't do that one with either gouge or scrapers....


does not do the roughing cut well

I find standard grinds to be much more limited in the amount of material they can remove.
a 5/8" bar with an Ellsworth grind can take a 3/4" shaving that is it remove 3/4" of wood from the surface inside or out in a single pass.
Even beginning students can take 1/2" shavings with no effort on the part of the turner.

With a traditional grind on a 5/8 bar most folks are going to get a 1/4" or less of wood removal.

Hmm, being contrary again, multiple eye rolls here, width is not the only factor, there is thickness to consider. Given same horse power, bowl size, rpm, and wood, you can remove wood equally fast with either tool. Al, I think it was you who quipped once on a thread that had some thing to do with roughing, and 'cut the wood as it wishes to be cut', 'Every one knows the wood does not wish to be cut'. What it comes down to is how far/hard you can push it without stalling your lathe. I can take a much thicker shaving with a 45/45, even if it is only 1/4 inch wide, than I can with a swept back gouge because I can push it harder. There isn't as much of a cutting edge as there is on a swept back gouge where I am taking a 1/2 inch wide shaving. I can take 1 1/4 inch wide scraper shavings that just about float in the air, or 3/4 inch shavings that fall to the floor, but not the other way around, well, unless I get a V8 powered lathe...

I will accept any challenge on who can rough the fastest, and bet that I can keep up with any one, and be faster than most when using my scrapers. Their advantage is that you push, then pull, then push again, and the cutting edge never comes out of the wood. With a gouge, you start the cut, push or pull down a bit, pull the tool out of the cut, come back to the top and start over... Yes, 'I may be crazy, but I'm nuts!' Maybe some year at the Symposium, there can be a group lathe for demos in the vendor area and instead of Mike's and Stuart's '2 Ways to Turn a Bowl' we can show several ways. The only real difference I can see in their methods is on the outside where Mike does a pull, and Stuart does a push....

I am having my camera man look into a zoom lens for the camera, or getting a zoom to use. So many details I can show with it that a standard camera won't show, like surfaces before and after a shear scrape. That entry cut would benefit from that as well, I will have to ponder the instructional methods to see if I can make it easier to understand. I have found it easier to correct habits if they are already formed, compared to students who come in at the 'this is a wood lathe' level. Having a working knowledge helps.

Side note, for finish cuts, and shear scrapes, I got a 600 grit CBN wheel from Ken Rizza, and have put a few miles in it for scraper burrs, and gouge cuts. Not much difference in gouge cuts, but the scraper burr: there appears to be a BIG difference in smoothness with the 600 grit burr. Better than honed, better than burnished, though I hand burnish, not the Lee Valley bench mount burnishing tool. Need the zoom lens...

robo hippy

 

[hockenbery]

Well, I hadn't checked in on this thread in a few days, thought it had died.... The differences in the shall we say more traditional grind, which to me is 45/45 bevel/sweep, and the Ellsworth/swept back grind has more to do with how much edge you can put into the wood at one time without stalling your lathe.

Reed,
We are in total agreement except for what a traditional gouge is. you have introduced a third grind into the discussion.
So we have apples & oranges & Tangerines. 🙂
We need to get our definitions aligned.

The 40/40 or 45/45 is a side ground gouge as it the Ellsworth grind. It just has a shorter wing and often a pointier nose.
I have not heard this gouge being called traditional grind but many folks use different terminology it may well be that folks in you area call 45/45 a traditional grind.
"traditional ground gouge" in the discussion is ground straight across and has no wing. the photo below from the Joe Larese article is below.
This is what we are calling a traditional grind.
It is the gouge Kelly describe in his post sharpening it in the pocket of the wolverine which would not produce a useable wing.

Everything you said about the 45/45 is true for the 45/45 but not true for the Traditional gouge ground straight across.
Being a side ground gouge, the 45/45 does the pull cut , the traditional gouge really can't do a pull cut the edge will dig in.
( the pull cut is a flute up cut if you think about it but with the handle down and the nose out of the wood it cannot catch)

The 45/45 also does most of the other cuts scraper, shear scrape, roughing cut that the Ellsworth does.
I don't think it does the flute up shear cut well. This cut does take a tiny cut. It is a finish cut.

Al

 

[Bill Boehme]

Reed,
We are in total agreement except for what a traditional gouge is. you have introduced a third grind into the discussion.
So we have apples & oranges & Tangerines. 🙂
We need to get our definitions aligned........

....... It is the gouge Kelly describe in his post sharpening it in the pocket of the wolverine which would not produce a useable wing.

........ Everything you said about the 45/45 is true for the 45/45 but not true for the Traditional gouge ground straight across.........

The picture that you posted sent me grabbing for my Glaser bowl gouge because what I see in the picture doesn't agree with either Glaser or Ellsworth gouges in the top row that shows the flute shapes. I believe that the picture on the top right ought to be labeled as the Glaser flute shape. I also believe that the top center flute shape matched the Ellsworth shape.

I have always thought of the Glaser flute shape as the quintessential "U" of flute shapes with the sides being very nearly vertical and also a somewhat narrow "U" compared to most current flute shapes. It also seems to be more prone to clogging.

I have two Ellsworth bowl gouges ... one is the Crown ProPM and the other is the Crown M2 HSS. The flute shape that I see in both of these gouges is a very broad bottom and sides that form a "V" shape.

My opinion, FWIW, is the bottom row of pictures would be far better if replaced with a perspective view.

Since you have clarified what you mean by "traditional", I have a new 3/4" Thompson "V" flute gouge sharpened in the Wolverine fixture (NOT a VariGrind) and it doesn't look like a straight across traditional shape. It helps to grind wings if the tool is removed from the handle.

I must have slept through the lecture that explained what the heck 45/45 or 40/40 is all about. This must be something new.

To Robo: It was the Mouse who had "Cut the wood as it wishes to be cut" in his signature. You are absolutely correct in saying that wood doesn't wish to be cut.

 

[hockenbery]

. I must have slept through the lecture that explained what the heck 45/45 or 40/40 is all about. This must be something new. To Robo: It was the Mouse who had "Cut the wood as it wishes to be cut" in his signature. You are absolutely correct in saying that wood doesn't wish to be cut.

Two posts up, three now
Reed considers the "traditional gouge" to be the 45/45
Our discussion was about the straight across grind being the "traditional"

 

[Douglas Ladendorf]

I must have slept through the lecture that explained what the heck 45/45 or 40/40 is all about. This must be something new.

Stewart Batty uses and promotes the 40/40 grind and that may be where the lecture came from.

To Robo: It was the Mouse who had "Cut the wood as it wishes to be cut" in his signature. You are absolutely correct in saying that wood doesn't wish to be cut.

That may have been to Robo but I got a good chuckle. 🙂 BTW I love the bowl in bowl effect above. Pretty cool.

Doug

 

[Odie]

In Odie's defense, my opinion is that the jig or fixture used only determines the angle of the grind and not the final shape. So, while Odie is is using the Wolverine fixture, that doesn't mean the shape is going to resemble a spindle roughing gouge. The shape depends completely upon the amount of time spent grinding at each point. The end result could range from an SRG lookalike to a a swept back shape with shorter wings than an Irish or Ellsworth grind. If I am not mistaken, Doug Thompson uses the Wolverine fixture to sharpen his bowl gouges. I have used his bowl gouges as they come to do most, if not all of the various cuts mentioned. Having said that, I eventually change the shape to an Irish lookalike with longer wings. My gouges all have different nose angles that range from 45 to 70 degrees.

Odie, the rim detail on your #670 isn't unique. I have seen a lot of very similar shapes as well as variations on that design where the "wing" has a natural edge. Square winged bowls and all of its permutations are variants of that idea.

Mornin' Bill.......

As I suggested in my post, I'm not surprised others, including you, have done an inside acute angle.....There is more to the total rim shape than this inside angle, or how well it's executed, or the amount of requiring sanding......however, it's not an important point, and I get your reasoning......😛

I'm glad to see I may have inspired some further discussion on what a "traditional" grind is. As I was using it, my intent with labeling it as such, was strictly intended to mean the gouge rotates along the longitudinal axis while the grind is being established. There is obviously some disagreement about what a traditional grind is, and it's understood it can be seen other than how I was intending it to use it.

quote from your post:

The shape depends completely upon the amount of time spent grinding at each point.

This is a particularly important statement, and is yet another way to define the traditional grind. The photo shown in Al's post shows one possibility for a traditional grind. (I sometimes use one like this, with the blunt end, for the bottoms of bowls.) However, considering your quote, there is almost an endless quantity of grind shapes that are in the realm of possibility. The bevel angles, as well as the length and curvature of the wings can be adjusted to suit the needs of the moment.

If Al wishes to define "traditional grind" as only that one in his photo, that's ok with me, but there are other shapes being discussed here.....not just that one. How would you prefer to label the other possible shapes that are ground in a similar way, but the shapes are entirely different?

ko

 

[hockenbery]

If Al wishes to define "traditional grind" as only that one in his photo, that's ok with me, but there are other shapes being discussed here.....not just that one. How would you prefer to label the other possible shapes that are ground in a similar way, but the shapes are entirely different? ko

Why not send a photo of your grind.

Most people and the author of the article define "Traditional grind" or "English grind" as one sharpened straight across.
The have the same bevel angle and the cut is the same through any rotation of the tool about the long axis of the tool.
The flute design can change the bevel angle a bit.


The side ground gouge has a wing and the bevel angle varies around the edge from nose to wing.
There are many many side ground gouges profiles.
The side ground gouges grinds vary a lot with nose angles, side angles, wing lengths, and profile of the flute.
The Ellsworth bevel at the nose is about 60 degrees, about 40-45 degrees at the front edge of the wing, and 25-30 degrees at the top of the wing.

 

[Odie]

Why not send a photo of your grind.

I'd be happy to do that, Al.....

Would you be willing to establish an online photo album of your turnings, with a link, and keep it up to date......so, that we all know you are more than an armchair turner?

ko

 

[robo hippy]

Al, looking at the pictures cleared things up some. Interesting that the Ellsworth is a parabolic flute, the Glaser is an open V, and the traditional is more of a V. The traditional looks to be nothing more than a bottom feeder type of bevel and grind. I tend to think of that type as being more of a half circle flute shape, which was probably a more common shape years ago, while the V was uncommon. another variation of the traditional grind I have seen, but not used is about a 45/45, but when sharpened, you grind down the top part of the flutes at about 45, then when sharpening the nose and bevel side, you just roll the tool, no sweeping as you sharpen. Not sure how useful it would be. With the V flute you show in the picture, that type of gouge would be pretty much worthless to me as I am cutting much more with the nose than with the wing.

robo hippy

 

[hockenbery]

I'd be happy to do that, Al..... Would you be willing to establish an online photo album of your turnings, with a link, and keep it up to date......so, that we all know you are more than an armchair turner? ko

Kelly,
One of the things l enjoy doing is sharing what I have learned with others. I do a few demos each year where I turn in front of an audience usually with video and microphone. It would be great to see you in the audience. You could see first hand how I turn wood.

You missed the Florida symposium last week.
http://floridawoodturningsymposium.com/demonstrators/al-hockenbery/
They still have some photos of my work on the FWS website. Top right and middle left are old work.
The rest are last 18 months You are welcome to look at the handouts too.
Lots of work shown in those, let me know if you have any questions.

Come to Atlanta! I hope that John Lucas, Reed Gray, and I can do some turning together to show the contrast and complimentary aspects of our different turning styles. John will be part of a presentation on digital photography, Reed will have a booth in the trade show, I will be doing 2 sand carving demos.

I have 3 club demos scheduled for 2016 may add a couple more and SWAT in 2017. Be great to see you the too!
I have a couple demo videos on YouTube you are encouraged to watch. Let me know if you have any questions.

Al

 

[Odie]

Kelly,
One of the things l enjoy doing is sharing what I have learned with others. I do a few demos each year where I turn in front of an audience usually with video and microphone. It would be great to see you in the audience. You could see first hand how I turn wood.

You missed the Florida symposium last week.
http://floridawoodturningsymposium.com/demonstrators/al-hockenbery/
They still have some photos of my work on the FWS website. Top right and middle left are old work.
The rest are last 18 months You are welcome to look at the handouts too.
Lots of work shown in those, let me know if you have any questions.

Come to Atlanta! I hope that John Lucas, Reed Gray, and I can do some turning together to show the contrast and complimentary aspects of our different turning styles. John will be part of a presentation on digital photography, Reed will have a booth in the trade show, I will be doing 2 sand carving demos.

I have 3 club demos scheduled for 2016 may add a couple more and SWAT in 2017. Be great to see you the too!
I have a couple demo videos on YouTube you are encouraged to watch. Let me know if you have any questions.

Al

Al......some of that I've seen a year or two ago. I'd like to see a photo album where you add to it on a regular basis. Some nice work, and with the exception of the hollow/natural edge forms, most of your work is in the embellishment category, and not indicative of pure turning skills. All of those at the top of the page are also embellishment. So goes the trend where making a classic bowl like Stocksdale, or Osolnik used to do is passe' these days. Look around.....the most difficult thing to do well on a classic bowl, is the interior.....and, you see with most turners these days, bowl interiors, are absent almost entirely. This isn't to suppose that a "detailed" exterior isn't without difficulty, but most exterior shapes you see are very basic, devoid of much detail.

If you are spending regular time in your shop, you should have no problem starting and maintaining an accessible album, kept updated with your current works. When the forum brings back the gallery photos, you ought to, after all these years, finally have an album......

ko

 

[Odie]

As per Al's request, here are a few of my standard ground gouges. There is one Ellsworth style grind at the far end, for contrast. The next time I need this one, it will be returned to a standard grind. As you can see, the bevel angles vary, as do the wing shapes and lengths. I'm finding I can get a tooled surface (prior to sanding) that is exceptional on any species and surface shapes.....as good, or better than the side ground, or Ellsworth style of grind. For me, how it's done, or what tool grind is used, is not nearly as important as the quality of the finish cut. The only thing that matters is final results, not the particulars of how it's done.

The third photo is of bowls I have in progress out in the shop right now. For me, pure turning excellence is a preference that far exceeds the ability to sand out imperfect cuts, or any torn grain. It must be as geometrically perfect as is possible, while eliminating as much sanding as possible......because sanding destroys geometric perfection......and, that is what ruins the aesthetics, or eye appeal of the details.

ko

 

[hockenbery]

Al..... with the exception of the hollow/natural edge forms, most of your work is in the embellishment category, and not indicative of pure turning skills. All of those at the top of the page are also embellishment.........the most difficult thing to do well on a classic bowl, is the interior.........and, you see with most turners these days, bowl interiors, are absent almost entirely. This isn't to suppose that a "detailed" exterior isn't without difficulty, but most exterior shapes you see are very basic, devoid of much detail...... ko

Most of what I do are hollow forms and natural edge bowls for empty bowls .
I am doing a lot with sand carving, however the form and surface needs to be there or the piece will fail. For me it is another level after the pure turning has been done. One that makes an ordinary piece of wood extra ordinary. The ball in the ball in the ball with the three sided stand is all turning.

I run into a lot of folks who have more trouble with the interior of bowls than the exterior so you aren't unusual in that regard.
I find the interior of the bowl easier to do than the exterior maybe it is the O'neil and Ellsworth influence.
Most of my bowl students do better on the interior on their early bowls maybe it's the experience they get turning the outside.
Maybe it's mostly being right handed. I find smaller bowls much easier than larger bowls
A 10" bowl is so much easier than a 16" bowl. The larger bowls I spend a lot of time refining the outside shape.
Even the interior will grow a bump or two that I have to blend into the inside curve.

Al

 

[john lucas]

Al I will see you in Atlanta. I got invited to do a POP committee with Rudy Lopez and John Bever. I had planned to go anyway but will definitely be there now.

Odie Your grinds look an awful lot like the 40/40 stewart Batty grind that I use on occasion. Can't tell the angle of course but the shape of the wings and curve of the front looks like that. Anyway we are arguing over oranges and apples. It really doesn't matter to me what tool you use it's the final results. I've use an AX and a Drawknife in demos to show that a cutting tool is a cutting tool. The final project is all that really counts. As far as embellishment goes, you can't hide imperfection. I'm sure Al knows this. The piece has to be perfect or any paint, burning etc you put over it still shows these.
Come join us at the symposium and we'll all have dinner together. One think I learned about communication on the internet is often we are simply misinterpreting what each of us are saying. Several years ago a turning teacher and I were disagreeing on various techniques. I suspected we were actually doing the same thing we just couldn't write it so both of us agreed. he was teaching at John C Campbell and I was coming back from Atlanta so I stopped in to meet him. I was right. We were actually basically doing the same things and we became friends and had great day. Sure wish you could join us. We would probably all have a good time.

 

[hockenbery]

John,
I knew you were in that bad bad group of photographers. Rudy is almost a neighbor and I just met John at the Florida Symposium.

I was thinking most of the bowl gouges in Kelly's photo had something close to the 40/40.
Stewart Batty, Cindy Drozda, Ashley Harwood and quite few other like this grind.

Bring a gouge or two and a Hunter. Maybe we can find a lathe to use in the trade show during a long break if we say nice things about it.
We'll get Reed to scrape a bowl for us too.

 

[Bill Boehme]

It occurred to me that I hardly ever think about assigning a name to the various grinds that I have on my bowl gouges although I do have favorite flute shapes. If I thought that it would make me a better turner then I might spend some time thinking about what I should call some of these grinds. I suppose that having a set of agreed upon names serves as a shortcut when discussing tools, but as we have seen when names aren't descriptive, not everybody would have the same mental picture that I have. It's reasonably clear what the grind and flute shape looks like if you mention the name Ellsworth. On the other hand, the term "traditional" could stand to be clarified with a more descriptive name.

..... If you are spending regular time in your shop, you should have no problem starting and maintaining an accessible album, kept updated with your current works. When the forum brings back the gallery photos, you ought to, after all these years, finally have an album......

Im not Al, but having enough time to photograph turnings sounds great in theory, but like everything else that requires time, there never seems to be quite enough to do everything that I want or need to do. I got volunteered to be in charge of creating the calendar for my city's 80th year celebration and it's interesting that projects that are basically about time never seem to have enough of it. So photographing life in our city today is putting my other photography activities on hold. And, because of that, my woodturning photography winds up being cell phone snapshot in bad lighting, if I am even fortunate enough to get that.

 

[robo hippy]

Odie, it looks like you prefer more open fluted designs compared to the more V shaped flutes. A variety of bevel angles too. I do like the steeper bevels for any concave shape, and most of the heel ground off. Part of the fun of a big play date would being using other turners grinds and trying their cuts. All of the Creator's children are different, and some of us are more different than the others.

robo hippy

 

[Odie]

Odie, it looks like you prefer more open fluted designs compared to the more V shaped flutes. A variety of bevel angles too. I do like the steeper bevels for any concave shape, and most of the heel ground off. Part of the fun of a big play date would being using other turners grinds and trying their cuts. All of the Creator's children are different, and some of us are more different than the others.

robo hippy

Hiya Robo.......

Yeah, I do prefer a more rounded flute. I've heard the term "parabolic" used, and I guess that fits what I feel is most useful for my own "different" style of turning. I feel the more rounded flute is better suited for twisting the gouge on it's axis, around a curve.....both inside and outside curves. That way, the placement of the cutting edge can be adjusted to where I want it to cut a little better and easier. (Very much in the way John Lucas feels about hand to eye coordination) The V flute is more difficult to manage in this way. The two gouges with red handles both have a V flute, and are ground with a very blunt bevel. This is working better for the purpose of some (not all) bottoms of bowl interiors. There is also a spindle, or detail gouge in there......but, all of them are ground into what I consider to be a "standard grind".

Heh,heh,heh......Being "more different" is a mantle I do claim.....it wasn't something that was initially intentional, but is a result of my evolving for so many years almost completely uninfluenced by what other turners were/are doing. I wouldn't change that, and I wouldn't change having the interactions I've had with other turners (via this forum) over the past decade, either. This forum has served to help me to solve problems, and with my further evolving, too. The good people here have influenced me to change perspective and applications to an already existing style. I've always spoken of "herd think", and I believe that moniker is aptly applied.......and, I feel I'm better suited to recognizing it, as the maverick, over others who have always, or mostly always* traveled with the herd.

*I say "mostly always" here, because I do recognize that some turners do express some amount, up to a great deal of individuality in their own styles......but, are still more influenced by "herd think", at a base level, than they realize they are......🙄

ko