Okay, three rings down, 39 more to go! Rather than bore you, I will clamp w/o posting. I will answer questions! If you need help falling asleep, I can DM you an update to assist with your sleep issue, haha!! Your Brother is here to help!
-
Beware of Counterfeit Woodturning Tools (click here for details) -
Johnathan Silwones is starting a new AAW chapter, Southern Alleghenies Woodturners, in Johnstown, PA. (click here for details) -
Congratulations to Jim Hills for "Journey II" being selected as Turning of the Week for May 6th, 2024 (click here for details) -
Welcome new registering member. Your username must be your real First and Last name (for example: John Doe). "Screen names" and "handles" are not allowed and your registration will be deleted if you don't use your real name. Also, do not use all caps nor all lower case.
Russ Braun's Segmenting Project
- Thread starter Russ Braun
- Start date
Tom Gall
TOTW Team
A suggestion for something to try - from a non-segmenter ..... so this may not work!
Cut a piece of wood with a shallow arc (segment of a circle) that is wider than your segments, and maybe long enough to engage 10-12 (or more) segments. Slide this under the tape at on end. This will open up the segments (over the arc) and make it easier to spread the glue with your skewers. Sort of like an accordion. Slide the arc under the next set of segments for gluing and continue until all are buttered up. Or maybe a large Ø dowel would serve the same function for opening up fewer segments but would work the same way.
Maybe this is a fix that doesn't need fixin' !!!
That is a cleaver idea Tom; it certainly would help with the gluing! This is a great benefit for follow along projects. I love how people’s minds get moving and great ideas pop up.A suggestion for something to try - from a non-segmenter ..... so this may not work!
Cut a piece of wood with a shallow arc (segment of a circle) that is wider than your segments, and maybe long enough to engage 10-12 (or more) segments. Slide this under the tape at on end. This will open up the segments (over the arc) and make it easier to spread the glue with your skewers. Sort of like an accordion. Slide the arc under the next set of segments for gluing and continue until all are buttered up. Or maybe a large Ø dowel would serve the same function for opening up fewer segments but would work the same way.
Maybe this is a fix that doesn't need fixin' !!!
Jim McLain
Artist
Russ - Great job with this follow along project. I don’t do any serious segmenting anymore but having started out as a segmenter it makes me want to try it again.
If you're cutting regular segs on a wedgie sled, you dont need to mark and keep them in the same orientation. It only matters if you are cutting skewed segments.
Actually, by orienting the segments in all cases according to the method in the Segmentology videos, it cancels out any errors in the verticality of the blade. No saw is perfect.
I'll challenge you on that Jerry. If the blade is off vertical, it will cut parallelogram shaped segments on a 2 arm sled.
If you flip them over, it makes no difference.
Verbolating can not be contained to one website….could it be viral?? Woohoo!!
Sooooo, if I understand correctly, no downside to this habit??
That's correct. If you are making regular segments, you don't need any of the marks, lines etc. You can assemble them in any random order with no geometrical impact. Doug went out to his shop to try and prove me wrong on this and failed!
If you are deliberately skewing the segments - like the no-fail base we have been discussing with grain at 45deg, that is a different story.
Grasshopper, the segments that come off one fence leans one way, the segments that come off the other fence lean the other way. When you alternate them the tilt error is cancelled out. Review Segmentology Tilt. Cut a few with the blade tilted 20 degrees.
Nope. Go try it. I did. Tilt your blade to 3 deg and run some segments. They are parallelograms, tilt is in same direction and they can be flipped to no effect.
Master - I think you need to edit your videos!!
Remember, this is a 2 arm sled, so you aren't flipping the board. The tilt direction won't change unless you flip the board.
Your segments in the video are very skewed and your blade angle is very wonky. You also didn't try to put them together in the wrong order. Go cut yourself a set with the blade tilted a few degrees and no intentional skew. They will go together fine so long as the included angle of the segments adds up to 360...... and flipping segments will do nothing.
Remember that Russ's sled is not out by 20 degrees, it's out by less than a 10th of a degree. His blade is likely within a degree of vertical.
Even when they are very skewed and the blade is very wonky, they will go together with correct fit although it will look kinda ugly.
Reduce your blade angle to a couple of degrees and your skew to a couple of degrees and all will be good. Joints will all go together at the correct angles. Flip segments in any order and it will still work.
This was cut with a 10deg skew and 10deg blade angle and I can get it together with no joint error and random segment placement. I actually have 3 complimentary pairs in this ring and the others are in wrong orientation.... With 10 degrees of error in both blade angle and sled skew. It looks kinda ugly but it fits together and will turn to a useable ring with no joint gaps.
Reduce those errors to typical setup errors and you won't see any problem at all, no ugliness and no joint errors. The wedgie angle is the only key one to get it to fit.
Remember that Russ's sled is not out by 20 degrees, it's out by less than a 10th of a degree. His blade is likely within a degree of vertical.
Even when they are very skewed and the blade is very wonky, they will go together with correct fit although it will look kinda ugly.
Reduce your blade angle to a couple of degrees and your skew to a couple of degrees and all will be good. Joints will all go together at the correct angles. Flip segments in any order and it will still work.
This was cut with a 10deg skew and 10deg blade angle and I can get it together with no joint error and random segment placement. I actually have 3 complimentary pairs in this ring and the others are in wrong orientation.... With 10 degrees of error in both blade angle and sled skew. It looks kinda ugly but it fits together and will turn to a useable ring with no joint gaps.
Reduce those errors to typical setup errors and you won't see any problem at all, no ugliness and no joint errors. The wedgie angle is the only key one to get it to fit.
Attachments
The segments in the video are not skewed at all The angle of the blade and skewing angle of the fences are not inter-dependent. To correct for blade verticality with conventionally cut segments, you alternate up and down as the sides are not parallel with segments cut with the wedgie sled, the sides are always parallel but the segments from the fences are opposite in every way. That is the only way you can make leaning segments. Make 2 segments with the fences symmetrical and the blade at 20 degrees +/- one from the top fence and one from the bottom fence.
I realize we are talking about two different things. It makes no difference which side is up. The segments must be alternated with the edge line in and out.
If they aren't skewed then you have just proved my point. Your segments are perfect parallelograms. Flip them over and what do you get? No change in geometry.
Thank you! We got to one agreement at least.
On your in and outs, it also doesn't matter in the realm of near vertical blade. You are getting thrown by the fact that you have a 20 degree blade angle, which makes things stack up awkwardly. Awkwardly but not impossibly. The joints will still not have a gap. You will just get a non flat ring. You will also get a non flat ring if you order them the way you are saying. It will be a concertina shape. Russ doesn't have a 20 degree blade angle, he is likely within 1 degree. With a 1 degree error in the blade angle, you won't even notice this. It will be removed when you flatten the ring whether they are ordered or not.
Any error is additive. By alternating the segments, they form a zig zag. If you line up a few of the same kind, a 1 degree error can add up to several degrees and a pesky gap on one side of a ring. I deal mostly with newbies that have a wide variety of equipment and skills. For many of them to be successful, the guidelines are a must. Any suggestion that they are not necessary triggers me to put on my gladiator hat. I just had this very issue last week with a beginner. He had a crappy saw and great photo equipment. He gave me a close up of the gap on one side of the ring. He did not alternate the segments. He does now. It would surprise you as to the effect of what you say has on beginners.
This is a fun discussion, hope I'm not making you too mad. Russ you started this!
I think we should teach people to understand this stuff rather than blindly follow rules. How many hundreds of people are flipping segments over - you just agreed this doesn't do anything. Russ is doing it in this project and he is no beginner. He is doing it because someone told him to.
If your beginner has gaps in his rings, it's not due to alternating segments, the errors don't accumulate. It's due to assembly process - not flattening rings properly during segment glue up and then not flattening them properly before stacking.
Zigzag
Random
Russ you started this!I think we should teach people to understand this stuff rather than blindly follow rules. How many hundreds of people are flipping segments over - you just agreed this doesn't do anything. Russ is doing it in this project and he is no beginner. He is doing it because someone told him to.
If your beginner has gaps in his rings, it's not due to alternating segments, the errors don't accumulate. It's due to assembly process - not flattening rings properly during segment glue up and then not flattening them properly before stacking.
Zigzag
Random
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2021
- Messages
- 1,237
- Likes
- 1,096
- Location
- Roulette, PA
- Website
- www.reallyruralwoodworks.com
Somehow I feel like you guys are arguing two different things - I am in Jerry's corner from experience what he means is if you take a 1" x 3/4" thick board and lay it down flat (1 inch side being face grain) and cut wedges as in like /\ triangle shaped , if you do not get a very precise exact angle for each segment when you put them together to form a ring, you ARE gonna have a gap between the last 2 segments - only way to fix is assemble half rings and flatten faces to mate flush Alternating the pieces does help offset slight (I mean hundredths of a degree) variations in your segments , assuming your sled is actually set to an accurate division of 360 degrees - I had perfect angle set on my sled, and yet due to loose tolerances in table saw (miter slot variations allowing sled to wiggle in some spots) stacked with wood that likes to move (oak) and thin kerf saw blade that wasn't as sharp as it could be, my first ring ended up with a gap (only .002, but in a wood turning, that is glaringly visible!) so for my second ring, I did as Jerry's video suggested, made a line on one face and then alternated my segments for second ring, ended up with just a hair (if even that) of a gap - couldn't quite see it but could catch edge of a sharp chisel in the gap. - with no difference in sled setup on saw.This is a fun discussion, hope I'm not making you too mad.
I think we should teach people to understand this stuff rather than blindly follow rules. How many hundreds of people are flipping segments over - you just agreed this doesn't do anything. Russ is doing it in this project and he is no beginner. He is doing it because someone told him to.
If your beginner has gaps in his rings, it's not due to alternating segments, the errors don't accumulate. It's due to assembly process - not flattening rings properly during segment glue up and then not flattening them properly before stacking.
So, upshot is I agree with Jerry - those little ever-so-slight variations will stack up - the more segments you have, the worse the gap. So the argument Jerry (and I) are making is not gaps between rings, it is gaps IN the rings segments. In many cases if you are working with top of the line equipment and very tight tolerances on your setup, you might not have any gaps at all doing it your way, so I see your point, but your argument seems based on having precision setups from the get-go , while Jerry's argument is towards the lower range of precision and care of set-up - doing it Jerry's way , the "newbies" and folks like me with less-than-premium equipment can still achieve nice gap-free rings with a lot less effort.
When you force segments to align on top and bottom it causes gaps. I enjoy a good discussion, I do not get mad. I make no claim that I know anything or everything about segmenting. I have helped a lot of newbies with limited skills and equipment get going with the segeasy plates and wedgie sled over the last 23 years and have had this same discussion many times also. My goal is simply to make segmenting a fun and successful experience for anyone that wants to try it. If someone that has their own way of doing things, I have no interest in converting them.
Segmenting as it is now is a fraction of what is possible. There is more to it than a simple pie shaped segment. I demonstrated a hint at the Chicago symposium with 3 dimensional stars, bottoms that will not crack and making a 2 layer feature ring with leaning and trapezoid segments, all cut with every angle different, without measuring a single thing, no test cuts. These things are only a tip of the iceberg. Stuff only possible with the Wedgie sled mathematical paradigm. Interestingly, advancements are always a result of the curiosity of the newbie crowd. Never the gurus. I will not live long enough to be more than a curious newbie myself.
Segmenting as it is now is a fraction of what is possible. There is more to it than a simple pie shaped segment. I demonstrated a hint at the Chicago symposium with 3 dimensional stars, bottoms that will not crack and making a 2 layer feature ring with leaning and trapezoid segments, all cut with every angle different, without measuring a single thing, no test cuts. These things are only a tip of the iceberg. Stuff only possible with the Wedgie sled mathematical paradigm. Interestingly, advancements are always a result of the curiosity of the newbie crowd. Never the gurus. I will not live long enough to be more than a curious newbie myself.
Brian, you are talking about something different than Jerry and I have been discussing. If your segment included angle is wrong due to inaccurate wedgie or slop in your miter slot etc, you will never get the pieces together unless you correct them. Alternating segments won't fix this angle error. If you have movement in your miter slot, you will have inconsistency, sometimes you will get gaps, sometimes you won't. Alternating segments will make no difference.
I've been trying to add diagrams to explain what I'm saying. If you are claiming you can fix incorrect segment angle by alternating segments, please show a sketch to show how this works. It sure makes no sense to me.
I really enjoy your vision Jerry. I work with a guy who can see through the fog and create solutions. Your no-fail base will be a game changer for me. My brain and nerdy nature make me question things that I don't understand. I'll question and challenge until I get it straight in my head. When I fully understand everything about segmenting, I'll quit doing it........ that will never happen!
Brian is not claiming anything. The actual problem was blade verticality and alternating the segments fixed it.
Headed to the shop, over and out.
I’m the instigator?? Extra two mins in the penalty box, haha!! I will admit that I learn more by rote than actually understanding why. This started with Shakespeare and has bled into woodturning. I am a big supporter of asking questions and opening discussion. Two mins in the box is well worth that! Hmmmm, is this the box I’m continually trying to get out of??This is a fun discussion, hope I'm not making you too mad.
I think we should teach people to understand this stuff rather than blindly follow rules. How many hundreds of people are flipping segments over - you just agreed this doesn't do anything. Russ is doing it in this project and he is no beginner. He is doing it because someone told him to.
If your beginner has gaps in his rings, it's not due to alternating segments, the errors don't accumulate. It's due to assembly process - not flattening rings properly during segment glue up and then not flattening them properly before stacking.
Zigzag
View attachment 56732
Random
View attachment 56733
I would also like to thank everyone for keeping this thread lively while I glue segments…a great example of the value of follow along projects.
Read the words, he is talking about segment angle. Shop time for me too......
All the rings are glued up, some of the Wenge rings have a bad joint! I think I tried to squeeze one more segment out of my stock; the short piece of stock might have moved during the cut. I fixed a few and have an idea on some others. These rings went through the drum sander, ready to be split.
Attachments
While the rings are still mounted to the “sled” board, I run them through drum sander to clean up saw marks, rings are ready to start stacking. I will individually run the cut off rings through the drum sander to get everything sized the same. Thickness will run about 5/16” which will let me flatten them when they get stacked on the lathe! A little more work to do first!!
Attachments
Holy cow that looks like a work of art by itself! Don't you find those long band clamps to be annoying to work with? I ended up buying the same type but in 3 different lengths so you don't have feet of extra clamp band hanging around.
I only just caught on to the way you are doing this, more efficient than the way I do it. I've been gluing them to a makeshift 90 degree sled for the bandsaw.... but the sled won't go through the drum sander. I think your method is simpler and more efficient.
Im a 43 year married man Steve, not easily annoyed, haha!!
I do try to be efficient due to shear volume of parts…..and I think being an ex General Contractor is showing through the cracks!
Last edited: