• Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Woodworking Interests

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

jeffpNC's Achievements

Apprentice Poster

Apprentice Poster (1/3)



  1. FWIW, I haven't found it particularly advantageous to shoot for "just below the slots". Mine is currently about an inch lower than most of the advice above. Haven't run into any situations yet where I thought "that would have worked a lot better if only my outfeed table had just been a half inch higher". Long story short, I think you would have to be up in the 2 or 3 inches too short arena before things would get wonky.
  2. jeffpNC

    Shellac fail

    Thanks all. After yesterday's disaster, I tried to solve it with a glass of scotch. Who knew that alcohol would actually turn out to be the ultimate solution! Worked like a charm. The quality of the information available on this forum is raising the general level of the internet as a whole. Thanks again!
  3. jeffpNC

    Shellac fail

    Well, I moved on to a different part of the same project that my "fuzzy maple" post was about. On the earlier part, I was really happy with the results I got with the Zinser bullseye de-waxed shellac for helping with the fuzzies. On this last separate "front piece" of the vanity, I seem to have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. (sorry, I sanded on it afterwards, and there isn't really any way to take a useful picture of the resulting mess) As before, I planed and scraped my piece as best I could, and then applied a coat of the shellac. At that point all was well, but there were still some stubborn areas that were improved by the first coat, but not perfect yet... So, despite my little one-quart can being near empty, I decided to try to get one last thin coat of the shellac on this piece before moving on to the finishing lacquer. Well, that second thin coat turned into a really bad idea. Seemed to have trouble getting it to go on smoothly, and ended up with a thick glossy gloppy mess. Previous times that I have applied a second coat of the sealer (after very mild sanding), it went just fine. My only guess is that the bottom quarter inch or so of stuff left in the can was more concentrated with "bug juice", having not been stirred enough as the can got used up. Does this seem like a likely explanation? Have others seen this kind of failure at the end of a can? The shellac didn't seem noticeably different when "dipping" in the can or draining off the foam brush I was using...but it did seem slightly different in terms of brushability and how it went onto the surface. I likely made it worse by trying to solve the initial minor failure by continuing to try to "go over it again to try to smooth it out". Shellac sets up so quickly that you really don't have much time to try to fix up small imperfections in your technique by going back over them a minute or two later. Any words of wisdom will be appreciated. I think this morning I will run the whole mess through the planer and start over.
  4. jeffpNC

    fuzzy maple

    Just a follow up to say thanks. I did two coats of Zinser Bullseye de-waxed shellac, with light sanding in between, followed with Minwax clear satin lacquer from a spray can. Came out better than I expected. The “fuzzy” areas never got as good as the non-fuzzy areas, but at least they ceased to be an eyesore that was ruining the piece. Never would have guessed that starting to apply finishes before I had "finished" sanding/planing/scraping would go this well.
  5. jeffpNC

    fuzzy maple

    OMG, really? I just assumed it would be an unholy mess if I didn't get it smooth BEFORE the finishing started.
  6. jeffpNC

    fuzzy maple

    I have some “curly” maple I’m using for a bathroom vanity. I’m having trouble getting all of the surface smooth and ready for finishing. Most of it is fine…but there are “trouble spots” that I don’t know how to deal with. Not surprisingly, these trouble spots are in areas that are “figured” or “curly”. That said…there are lots of areas that are even more figured where there is no problem at all. The picture shows one such area. This board has been planed on the “fine” setting with my DW735, and hand planed and card scraped and sanded ( and cursed at ). Nothing I have tried has completely solved this. So far, card scraper with NO SANDING seems to get me closest to a good finish…but there are still these trouble spots. These few spots seem to just “want” to be fuzzy like this. When I have used other boards from this batch, I have always been using smaller and more narrow pieces, and was able to work around them. This project needs some larger pieces, making it less practical to be that picky. BTW, this is "soft" maple if that matters to the solution.
  7. The most frequently recurring theme here seems to be having a space right inside the door that is designed for breaking down large pieces from storage. I'm thinking this might be a longish narrow space with a miter saw station (with long tables) on one side, and a panel-saw on the other side. (or maybe a 5' by 10' table with a track saw instead of the panel saw)
  8. Thanks all...the search is on for a rectangular dinosaur.
  9. So what about the best shape for the main machine room? I'm thinking of this as the room with tablesaw with long extensions nestled up to a movable outfeed/assembly table...which together fill the middle of the space. Around that in some shape and with plenty of elbow room, live the various sanders and drill press and miter saw type machines and a hand-tool bench. Would the shape of that area within a "rectangular building" still want to be square or rectangular? What about a more or less circular main area in the middle of the building, where the corners of the building then become the "rooms", like bathroom, finishing room, etc.? I guess the question is would such a circular space around the saw/assembly-table "island" make for a better flow, or would it be better for that outer ring to still be rectangular?
  10. While there is ample space to build...more building means more money. So there are practical limits to the size. That makes me think that lots of separation by activity will lead to a bunch of cramped little spaces. I'm thinking I want to do some of that, but sparingly. One example of that is the "bathroom". It's just me there. I guess I'm a loner. Not in the uni-bomber sense, but at least in the living arrangement sense. For me, the bathroom can be just a urinal on the wall next to the utility sink. Don't need a "room" for it. What's that you say? Resale value? My nieces and nephews can worry about that after I'm in the ground pushing up a walnut tree.
  11. I just bought the large lot for my "forever" homestead. Naturally, given that I'm posting here, a nice shop building is a big part of the plans. So, I'm just starting the "blank piece of paper" part of the design process. Blue-skying it, as it were. I started thinking "inside the box", in a rather literal fashion. Then yesterday, while looking at the most likely spot for the building, realized that a non-square shape, like an "L" shaped building would allow me to make it bigger while still taking down fewer nice big trees. That got me to thinking...what would be the ideal "shape" for a shop? Would the ideal shop be a square? A rectangle? A triangle? A circle? Maybe a Pentagon shaped building with an atrium? What sayeth the crew here? What shape would be the ideal shop layout, and why?
  12. The automotive applications mostly involve making it easier for vehicle owners to annoy a larger number of people with their bone-shattering subwoofers. As for the nuclear option...I'm not a "prepper", just an engineer and a guy who isn't rich enough to want to pay "the man" for my power for the next 10 to 40 years (depending upon how long this old body lasts).
  13. I have no personal experience with them yet, but the marketing hype on all the related sites claims they can handle repeated deep discharge without damage.
  14. The Tesla power wall is just an assemblage of the same lithium ion cells they use in their cars. Lithium ion cells are not very cost effective. Their best use is in situations where weight/size are a big factor, where they blow away everything else for "watts per pound" or "watts per cubic foot". For a non-mobile off-grid solution, frankly, they suck. About twice the initial cost of Edison batteries or lead acid, and about one third of the life expectancy of Edison (Nickel Iron). One point in favor of lithium in the case of an off-grid shop would be its ability to provide a faster discharge rate. Something like lead acid or Edison would be best with super-caps to supply inrush current. Probably not needed with lithium ion. That one plus point is substantially outweighed by the (comparatively) low cost and long life of Nickel Iron.