Greetings,
Awhile back the notion of ironing a laser-printed pattern onto the
work came up. I recently needed to transfer a pattern. I chose to use
this method just to post this report.
The stock is 5/4 ash, the project is a frame saw. Because I was going
to spokeshave off lots of stock, I only trued one face and one side.
I use Adobe Illustrater for my plans because I like it.
This particular saw takes a 28" blade. The vertical members came out
to 19.75". Had to tile two pages to get the printout. I added two
registration marks in waste areas. Did a copy'n'flip to get two mirrored
patterns. Printed two copies. Cut out and taped the tiled pieces
together. Taped a pattern on the trued face of each vertical arm. I ran
the iron up to "Linen." (Also had a pattern for the mortise side with
registration lines to match up to the face patterns.)
OK, so the results. The seam where the two pages met was, of course,
exactly at a region of interest. Kind of like fighting your battles at
the corners of four map sections. The transfer went just fine on the
trued faces. Drilled 1/8 " holes through the reg marks and aligned the
mirror copy on the back sides. Surprise, the transfer on the back sides
missed the valleys. I only used two registration marks. Needed six,
three for each sheet. Even though I lined the pattern pieces up with a
straightedge, the tape gave a little. The tape caused another problem: I
used a scrap of aluminum foil twixt the iron and the pattern when I went
over the taped places. Transfer worked fine; the tape passed the heat
through. It also came off the pattern and stuck to the foil.
Once the toner gets stuck to the wood, it glues the pattern paper down
so it doesn't jiggle around. However, I suspect that if it cools too
much before lifting the paper, then the paper peels the toner back off
the wood. A couple of panels came out light, but my peel-off idea is
after-the-fact guessing, not direct observation.
I would use this method again. On thin stock, only one side might need
marking. I cared that the two verticals came out the same; I didn't care
if they matched the original pattern precisely. So, the misregistration
front and back wasn't too big an issue. I hadn't planned to put patterns
on front and back; I would have trued both faces.
Right now, the arms are roughed out and mortised. I'm working through
gnarly grain on the crosspiece. Fun with tearout, but that's a different
thread :-)
--
"Keep your ass behind you."
Wed, Jul 7, 2004, 1:34pm (EDT-1) [email protected]
(Australopithecus=A0scobis)
Greetings, <snip>
As long as you don't lose sight of the two most important details.
One. That there ARE simpler, easier, faster, ways of doing all
that. It doesn't NEED to be that complex / complicated.
Two. As long as you're having fun, no prob.
JOAT
What we see depends mainly on what we look for.
- Sir John Lubbock
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (J T) wrote:
> One. That there ARE simpler, easier, faster, ways of doing all
> that. It doesn't NEED to be that complex / complicated.
Yah. I think the iron-on method is well suited for complex patterns that
have to be just so. If matching a particular pattern is not so
important, as in my application, the simpler the better. FWIW, I made my
first 12" bowsaw by tracing a printout of the bugsaw (DAGS) via a sheet
of credit-card-receipt carbon paper.
OT, but I noticed that the "Bugsaw" has a couple of dimensions in the
Golden Ratio. (I sized my current saw to GR ratios; the inflection
points for the curves, and the location of the crossbar, e.g., fit that
ratio.) I was amused that my affection (affectation!) for the GR was a
reflection of a past (real) craftsman.
--
"Keep your ass behind you."
Wed, Jul 7, 2004, 5:10pm (EDT-1) [email protected]
(Australopithecus=A0scobis) says:
Yah. I think the iron-on method is well suited for complex patterns
<snip>
True. However, I always had trouble geting dark lines, even on
light color wood, and on dark wood, about impossible to see. So, I
don't use it anymore. For what I'm doing now, gluing the pattern down
works best. That does play Hell if you want to reuse the pattern tho.
LMAO
But, even as I type, it struck me. I wonder how a white wash coat
would work, to iron the pattern down on. Then, sand after, to take the
wash off. Possibly shellac first, then the wash, so the wash doesn't
soak into the wood, so excessive sanding isn't needed, to remove it.
I'm thinking the wash would make the lines show up a lot better. May
check that one day, just in case.
JOAT
What we see depends mainly on what we look for.
- Sir John Lubbock
Use magenta, yellow or some other contrasting color for your pattern. That
makes it a lot easier to see, although it requires color toner from a color
LaserJet or a color copier.
You could even use a green-on-red pattern for optimum visibility, but you'd
need a program like Adobe Illustrator, or some advance CAD work to create it
accurately. What I'm talking about is that each drawing line contains
alternating stripes of green-red-green.
TRU -- Tony Uranga
(Hewlett-Packard Design Engineer)
"J T" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Wed, Jul 7, 2004, 5:10pm (EDT-1) [email protected]
(Australopithecus scobis) says:
Yah. I think the iron-on method is well suited for complex patterns
<snip>
True. However, I always had trouble geting dark lines, even on
light color wood, and on dark wood, about impossible to see. So, I
don't use it anymore. For what I'm doing now, gluing the pattern down
works best. That does play Hell if you want to reuse the pattern tho.
LMAO
But, even as I type, it struck me. I wonder how a white wash coat
would work, to iron the pattern down on. Then, sand after, to take the
wash off. Possibly shellac first, then the wash, so the wash doesn't
soak into the wood, so excessive sanding isn't needed, to remove it.
I'm thinking the wash would make the lines show up a lot better. May
check that one day, just in case.
JOAT
What we see depends mainly on what we look for.
- Sir John Lubbock
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (J T) wrote:
...
> But, even as I type, it struck me. I wonder how a white wash coat
> would work, to iron the pattern down on. Then, sand after, to take the
> wash off. Possibly shellac first, then the wash, so the wash doesn't
...
OK, following your thought... iron the pattern down first, then
whitewash and ... press the work flat against some paper. Offset
printing--we take the white off the toner tracks.
I suspect the heat of the iron would turn shellac+whitewash into a
horrid mess.
I, too, have glued the pattern down. Super 77. Spokeshaved the paper off
as I went along (round stuff).
--
"Keep your ass behind you."