I've been using my 41" high bench and vintage tools for about two months. Still a very short time and not ready to make any long term conclusions. I do like the height on the workbench for layout, breaking down stock, and housing dados. I have found the height to require more effort for my hand planes which isn't surprising given I can't get as much lower body into. I do like my vintage chisels. I can't tell you if they hold the edge as long as my Lie Nielsens do because I tend to sharpen frequently as a matter of habit. I do like my No 5 vintage hand plane. The No 3 vintage hasn't worked as well and I think I have the mouth too tight so I will get around to adjusting that. The large vintage saws are noticeably heavier than my Lie Nielsen hand saws - don't like this as of now but need to spend more time using them. Haven't used the vintage dovetail saw yet so how I really feel about that remains to be seen.
Long term, I will likely get another bench in the shop that is lower around 36" (target will be 4 hand spans). Jim Toplin and Geroge Walker talk a lot about hand spans as a measuring tool and I really think they are correct. In fact, Toplin has an awesome YouTube video on the topic https://youtu.be/bBS5-AV81lg?si=pHLwEbHWH4s2IQ0O Toplin talks about 4, 5, 6 hand spans as the three ideal heights to have. Four hand spans for hand planing stock; 5 hand spans for layout and much of the joinery work, and 6 hand spans for dovetails and really fine work.
My current workbench turns out to be 5 handspans (which I was happy to see). I have a kit for a Moxon vise and that will get me to 6 hand spans. Thus, I need another bench to be 4 hand spans. Could either take my current bench off of its elevations or make a shorter bench. Not sure when I will get around to making that bench. As for the moxon vise, I have the hardware and will likely make the vise in about 2 to 3 months. The current Becksvoort's 15 drawer chest will require lots of dovetail work so it makes sense to make it for that project. Just need to decide what wood to use. A good problem. Poplar is a likely choice. I will go to my lumber store and see what they have and see what else I can get for the same price as poplar and then make a decision. All good problem.s
what about using a duck board?
ReplyDeleteFor me the Paul Sellers recommendation works well (I am 1.75 m).
It corresponds to a study with a large panel which recommend about 15 cm below elbow height (with your shoes on). This study was taking into account not only back pain but also neck, shoulder, elbow, wrist, ... pain.
This height is also this for me:
https://www.lumberjocks.com/threads/work-bench-smack-down.31539/page-109#post-483838
For me it makes sense to relate it mainly to your back articulation.
latest Paul Sellers video on the subject:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vml_eHE71Ec
Hi Sylvian, a duckboard (raised platform) is certainly one way to get the best of both worlds. Certainly less work than building a new bench. I will keep this in mind. I was also noodling on Instagram with a fellow woodworker on building a bench with the two sides of different height. One side lower for the hand plane work and the other higher for the joiner. Would require access to both sides of the bench. When the lower side isn't in use, it could act as a tool well with removable sides sitting in dog holes. Your duckboard is simpler for sure.
ReplyDeleteYour back articulation makes a lot of sense. I certainly am limited in my knowledge of the ergonomics that need to be evaluated. Glad you found a height that works for you. I could see lowering this bench by about an inch or so but would likely test that first by putting a plywoodsheet or two on the floor to raise me.
Each person is different for sure. When the Olympic swimmer Michael Phelps was at his peak competitively, I recall the Olympic hosts explaining what natural body measurements worked to his advantage for swimming. Year later, I caught a Podcast (can't recall the one - maybe a TED Talk) that went on to describe the technology was at the point where if you were naturally inclined to athletics, they could measure your various body parts and tell you what sport you might have some advantages from a competitive point of view. I found it fascinating but sports wasn't a natural ability of mine at all - mostly warmed the bench. Math and science were my superpowers.