Today I was using an 880, not mine - one from the milling yard - and it had a 404 chain on it. After using it to cut some fat cookies as bases for placing logs on for milling I noticed the kerf width was not as wide as I remember. So I then got completely distracted by kerf width testing.
What I discovered was it was quite tricky to measure the kerf with a digital caliper because the chain dances around a bit when it starts the cut and the start of the cut is wider than once it stabilizes some ways into the wood. The other thing I noticed is the kerf is slightly opened up by the other side of the chain as it passes through the wood so one cannot just measure the kerf of a shallow depth cut. I tried using a feeler gauge but that did not work as it could not get down into all the little ridges and just rides the tops of the narrowest gaps, so it underestimated the actual kerf.
What I ended up doing was making a cut deeper than twice the width of the bar. Then I cut across the first cut at right angles and used a digital caliper to measure the kerf in the cross section where both sides of of the chain had passed through the cut. The digital caliper inside measuring knife blades were also able to get into all the little cutting grooves made by the chain as it cuts.
The real kerf is even bigger than this because the cut wanders slightly back and forth across the average cutting line and it is not the width of the cut being made but the extent of the wander that defines the real loss of wood due to the kerf - anyway that was too hard to handle so I stayed with the method above.
I made at least 10 measurements and averaged the results
a) 404, semi-chisel, near new chain, kerf width was 0.337"
b) 3/8 new semi chisel, new, 30º top plate angle, kerf width 0.327"
c) 3/8 LP, new, chisel, 30º top plate angle kerf width 289"
d) 3/8 LP, new, chisel, 10º top plate, kerf width 0.280"
All of the above were cross cuts in very hard, cross grained wood.
At the last minute I also tested chain d) in milling cross grain mode and got 295" !
The tolerance on the results (twice standard error) were all about 0.010"
Leaving the tolerance aside for the moment
1) The 404 has a kerf that is only 3% bigger than the standard 3/8!
I have to say I am somewhat surprised by that 404 has a gullet that is more than 3% bigger so it can carry more sawdust so that explains why 404 cuts more effectively than one thinks.
2) Lopro reduces kerf by 13%
One problem with this comparison is the chain cutters are not same - the std 3/8 is semichisel while the lp is chisel. Maybe the lp semichisel would have s slightly smaller kerf
In terms of reach inches of thickness saved, using LP will save a whopping 1" of wood after making 21 cuts. This raises the issue of whether it is really worth using lp to save wood
3) 30º top plate cuts a marginally wider kerf than a 10º toplate
Perhaps not unexpected since the higher top plate angle have the cutter diving slightly wider to make the cut.
4) Cross cutting cuts narrower than cross grain by 5%
I have heard this before, cross cutting leaves small torn wood fibres in the cut which pads out the kerf. The real kerf is the same as for mill. This should be less of an issue in straight grained softer woods.
Now if one take tolerance into account then there is no difference between 404 and 3/8; no difference between using different top plate angles, and no difference between cross cuts and milling. The only significant kerf difference is between 3/8 and 3/8LP but is the 13% worth it?
I would be interested to see what some of you straight grained softwood millers get.
Hopefully I can now get back to milling ;-)
Cheers
What I discovered was it was quite tricky to measure the kerf with a digital caliper because the chain dances around a bit when it starts the cut and the start of the cut is wider than once it stabilizes some ways into the wood. The other thing I noticed is the kerf is slightly opened up by the other side of the chain as it passes through the wood so one cannot just measure the kerf of a shallow depth cut. I tried using a feeler gauge but that did not work as it could not get down into all the little ridges and just rides the tops of the narrowest gaps, so it underestimated the actual kerf.
What I ended up doing was making a cut deeper than twice the width of the bar. Then I cut across the first cut at right angles and used a digital caliper to measure the kerf in the cross section where both sides of of the chain had passed through the cut. The digital caliper inside measuring knife blades were also able to get into all the little cutting grooves made by the chain as it cuts.
The real kerf is even bigger than this because the cut wanders slightly back and forth across the average cutting line and it is not the width of the cut being made but the extent of the wander that defines the real loss of wood due to the kerf - anyway that was too hard to handle so I stayed with the method above.
I made at least 10 measurements and averaged the results
a) 404, semi-chisel, near new chain, kerf width was 0.337"
b) 3/8 new semi chisel, new, 30º top plate angle, kerf width 0.327"
c) 3/8 LP, new, chisel, 30º top plate angle kerf width 289"
d) 3/8 LP, new, chisel, 10º top plate, kerf width 0.280"
All of the above were cross cuts in very hard, cross grained wood.
At the last minute I also tested chain d) in milling cross grain mode and got 295" !
The tolerance on the results (twice standard error) were all about 0.010"
Leaving the tolerance aside for the moment
1) The 404 has a kerf that is only 3% bigger than the standard 3/8!
I have to say I am somewhat surprised by that 404 has a gullet that is more than 3% bigger so it can carry more sawdust so that explains why 404 cuts more effectively than one thinks.
2) Lopro reduces kerf by 13%
One problem with this comparison is the chain cutters are not same - the std 3/8 is semichisel while the lp is chisel. Maybe the lp semichisel would have s slightly smaller kerf
In terms of reach inches of thickness saved, using LP will save a whopping 1" of wood after making 21 cuts. This raises the issue of whether it is really worth using lp to save wood
3) 30º top plate cuts a marginally wider kerf than a 10º toplate
Perhaps not unexpected since the higher top plate angle have the cutter diving slightly wider to make the cut.
4) Cross cutting cuts narrower than cross grain by 5%
I have heard this before, cross cutting leaves small torn wood fibres in the cut which pads out the kerf. The real kerf is the same as for mill. This should be less of an issue in straight grained softer woods.
Now if one take tolerance into account then there is no difference between 404 and 3/8; no difference between using different top plate angles, and no difference between cross cuts and milling. The only significant kerf difference is between 3/8 and 3/8LP but is the 13% worth it?
I would be interested to see what some of you straight grained softwood millers get.
Hopefully I can now get back to milling ;-)
Cheers
Last edited: