firewood?

[mrgrimsdale]

What would you do with this:



It's nearly all there:





Some interesting dovetails. he obviously didn't know that one in 6 or 8 gradient is absolutely compulsory ;D ;D:



Anyway I'm going to have a bash at putting it all together. Yes it's crying out for mdf I realise

Any suggestions welcome

chee
Jacob

[engineerone]

sad thing is jacob that when you have rebuilt it to a decent standard, it will still be worth less than you paid in time and work for it.

it looks interesting though, what age do you think, and is it oak, or

be a waste of decent mdf to add it in to this ;D

looking forward to wip pictures

paul

[paulchapman]

Do it up and flog it, at an exhorbitant price, to some unsuspecting yuppie as a piece of rare, 18th century, Grimsdale cabinet making ;D

Taking the piss, but might be worth a try

Cheers

Paul

[tusses]

put a really rubbish coat of white mat emulsion on it - missing bits out here and there .

Then sell it for £500 as shabby chic. !

if it was me - i'd (i do) dissasemle it and use any good wood to make something else out of it.

the rest keeps my workshop warm ;D

[mrgrimsdale]

First thing, off with their knobs!



All in good nick except one broken wood screw. Feet not so good, only 2 left. Nice excuse for a bit of turning:



Off with the top. Is a later addition - just 2 planks of something, lighter then redwood, pinker than whitewood, wormy, so may scrap.



Runners all fooked. Some new ones bodged to the panels which is why they are split, should have been fixed across to frame, leaving panel free to move



The panel moulding around the end panels is also planted on to the drawer fronts which means no stopped dovetail required. Cheap but effective.




The drawer bottoms are slotted into the sides. A weak detail, and this is what happens:



Several drawer sides similarly worn out, so will consider replacing with drawer slips added instead, trimming a bit off the bottoms.

Next job is to make up a rod: measure everything on the front to work out what sizes they were supposed to be, and anything else which seems necessary. This is where you take control of the job IMHO and are planning your next steps, like a route map, rather than doing it in bits n bobs.

cheers
Jacob

[mrgrimsdale]

Taking off measurements for a rod:



Quicker, more accurate and more useful than tape measurements. Frinstance you can do an immediate check on other parts to see discrepancies and differences:



Then transfer to the rod itself:



Couldn't find any 4" stuff for feet so raided the logpile. Probably not dry and will crack, but that's how the originals are!



Take off waste by joining up the lines:





It's possible and quite sensible to do the whole thing without measuring anything just using laths and rods instead, taking off widths with marking gauges. Much quicker and more accurate. Avoids 'rounding off' errors. The old man wouldn't have had a tape, but most likely a boxwood rule. His 15 3/4 inches would be different from anybody elses. Avoids all those adding up errors. Is immediately accessible and easy to interpret - unlike a jumble of figures on a page, and so on..... ;D

So why am I bothering with this pile of junk? 1st because it's old and in the way. 2nd it could be a nice bit of furniture. 3rd I quite like doing this sort of thing. 4th I've got a secret plan to get away from joinery and into furniture instead, especially stuff from "the great tradition" such as this piece, which is nothing special but every inch of it was done properly and intelligently by some old tradesmen anonymous and long dead.


cheers
Jacob

[paulchapman]

Looking forward to watching this develop, Jacob.

Cheers

Paul

[colincott]

Me too

[mrgrimsdale]

More rodneying: the horizontal measurements:



Turn it round the other way to check for symmetry, same size openings etc etc. This all takes seconds with a rod but would be a lot longer with tape measurements:



Might add more detail direct to the rod later, if necessary. All the details are taken direct to the rod on this length of mfc, including any notes, meaurements etc. So its all in one place and everything can be seen to fit, or not, by frinstance laying on pieces.
In the meantime a good scrub with sugar soap. Found this double drainer catering sink in a skip. Just the job.
I don't like pine dipping - even if done well it still looks sorta 'boiled cabbage', but washing is a lot more work.



In the meantime can turn the feet. Done six, all subtly different from one another . I was trying to make them identical but I'm a bit of a novice with turning. But I have found out how to sharpen gouges with least fuss - belt sander!
The old knobs are slightly different sizes anyway, so mine will do.
Ash BTW from a sapling on my allotment. Must do something abt the weeds, this one 30' high.



This is strictly speaking, junk furniture, but I like it. I'm impressed by the ruthless economy e.g. the insides of the panels are not planed. Well, they are out of sight, planing reduces the thickness/stiffness and is extra work. You can see here where the field has been taken off with a jack plane.
For those who don't know - fielding reduces the edge thickness so that a thicker (hence stiffer) panel can sit in a narrower slot in a narrow rail or stile. It's not just a decorative effect. Neither are dovetails. Most of what you see in trad joinery is down to practicality, which is what makes it so important as an information resource.



But the back of the kennel door is seen a bit, so, it's also planed just a bit! As you can see from the wavy edge to the field. Just enough. Better job done on the front.
This sort of economy goes all the way through and I think is revealing about practical and economical ways of making things. This really shows when you get to the dovetails, more later

[9fingers]

A real labour of love Jacob.

I hope you get a happy ending - ie the right mix of personal satisfaction and financial reward!

Bob

[mrgrimsdale]

Oct 3, 2008 20:51:15 GMT 9fingers said:

A real labour of love Jacob.

I hope you get a happy ending - ie the right mix of personal satisfaction and financial reward!

Bob

Thanks for that. I'm enjoying it, it's a learning curve, but I've serious doubts about the financial reward. Don't tell mrs G anybody

Next episode:

KNOBS FEET akimbo:



Took a long time but got it down to half an hour for the last one. I guess a skilled turner would do one in 10 minutes. They are all slightly different but I don't care. Starting to crack - the ash was about 8 months old, not enough drying time obviously. Matches the old ones anyway. Fill cracks with putty, turn them inwards, paint, nobody will know. ;D. Good idea using rubbish wood for practice. For finished products too. In fact there's no such thing as rubbish wood, unless you are thinking of mdf ;D
Took a long time as I was fiddling about with various things - sharpening gouges with BELT SANDER brilliant.
Gave up taking off bumps with a plane - just straight on to the lathe at lowest speed instead.
Made several trial tool racks to keep them in place whilst off-centre log was shaking things up. All scrap wood BTW. Cost nowt ;D. This was final version:



The washing and hosing had loosened things up so could move the panels about and get them stuck together again. G cramp holds panel half, sash cramp pulls them up tight. Glue in the crack only, not near the edges. Panels must stay free to move. Just using bottle PVA. Well it's only furniture innit, not like joinery where everything has to be done to top spec.




Prising things apart: 2 thin scrapers with fat bolster stuck between, doesn't damage edges. Nails all rusted in. Good job its not screwed or separation would be impossible. Nails and glue - best for almost everything.



Next episode DOVETAILS yee hah!

cheers
Jacob

[mrgrimsdale]

As I said earlier the dovetails aren't stopped but instead the ends are covered with a panel moulding - added-value decoration and less work!

Drawer sides quite conventional it seems. More pins (single kerf) at the front end to keep it well stitched together, fewer pins (double kerf) at the back where it doesn't matter - but fatter to make up for the missing pin strength:



Look a bit random sized, but hang on a minute - the back ones are graded - fat at the bottom and smaller at the top. Quick check - they are all like that on all the drawers, ergo: must be intentional!! Can't say I've ever seen that before. Has anybody else?
But what for? The following is pure guesswork:
Imagine worst case drawer scenario i.e. contains several small cannon balls say diameter 2/3rd depth of drawer, but nothing else. As you yank the drawer out (loading cannon in a hurry) the balls will all cannon to the back and collide with lowest portion of the back - where more strength is thus needed!! Obvious really. A valuable trad detail to be remembered, esp if war breaks out.

This whole piece made by man/men or girls in a hurry is obvious. So would expect the dovetails to have been sawn in a gang. Easy to check and in fact they were sawn in pairs for each drawer, as you can tell by matching them up:



And note, no knifed shoulder marks, just pencil. The shoulders are bit rough but this is furniture in a hurry!



But if you look closely you can see that the pins are knife marked, and on both sides too. I wouldn't expect that - surely the pins would be marked on the ends, from the tails, and sawn down freehand?
Then stranger things - the tails are heavily knife marked too, but only on the outside, as you can see in the top photo. But they were sawn in a pair, and no marks would be necessary surely? A simple freehand job? Perhaps just the position of the single kerf marked on the edges?

It took me some time to work this out.

A knife mark is used mainly to cut a clean edge for e.g. a shoulder - most commonly with dovetails. But they haven't done that here, so why knife the other bits?
Well the answer is (I think) that the other reason for knife marking is to make an indelible mark. A single workman wouldn't need this, but teamwork might.
I've seen that on my big windows - all the mortices were marked on one side with a knife, and carried around the other sides with a pencil. My theory is that the knife mark was put there by a senior craftsmen, rodney the rodman, taking it from the rod - but the rest was done by a lower order apprentice - the pencil marks and the sawing, morticing etc. He couldn't get it wrong as rodney had done the marks.

Back to the dovetails - I think the marker-upper put knife marks on the side pieces clamped together, which was then sawn and waste removed by the apprentice. The marker upper then took the tails to mark the pins, and ditto with the cutting out.
In other words 2 men on the job - controlled by the senior doing all the marking, and the junior doing all the work. Hence also the roughish shoulders.
This confirms that setting-out / marking-up is more important than the craft-work itself, as I have alway said!
Have you got a better explanation?

cheers
Jacob

[paulchapman]

Oct 4, 2008 18:33:06 GMT mrgrimsdale said:

Starting to crack

That's why brass knobs are better ;D ;D

Looking good, Jacob.

Cheers

Paul

[tusses]

a few years ago I had an 'antiques' pitch in a barn. I did a lot of what you are doing , and loved it to bits. the finished stuff sold quite well price wise, but not fast enough to make any kind of living.

I - like you - just enjoyed seeing how it 'was' done years ago

I still do , love reading the 'olde' books, but wouldn't try and do it for money any more !

Rich

[mrgrimsdale]

Having a closer look at knife marks. The pins are marked both sides very precisely, outside front shown here :



The tails are marked on the outside only:



That makes sense because they were sawn in pairs, inside to inside, so the marks would show on the two outsides.

But all the marks are longer than they need to be, sometimes with quite a flourish.
This leads me to another idle speculation - that the marks were put there by the senior expert as described above, but also that they were intended to be seen after the job had been done.
This would provide a check on any errors. You'd be able to tell if it was the sawing or the marking which was at fault, and hence who to blame!

That is part of what is so interesting about work, of whatever level of quality, done in the age of wood, by experts. Everything you see is done is purposefully; usually knowingly by the craftsman concerned, but sometimes blindly; just in obedience to the collective knowledge of the tradition.
Hence the power of tradition - you are not alone on the job so to speak.

cheers
Jacob

[mrgrimsdale]

As you can see from the photos many of the dovetails look a bit skew-whiff so, in for a penny, I thought I'd measure a few.
A random selection of angles from each side of 5 pin holes (i.e. between the tails) goes as follows: 22/12, 3 at 24/11, 18/16, degrees from the perpendicular.
I really can't guess why they are so irregular, but the included angle is consistent, i.e. 34 to 35 degrees.
This gives an average of 17.5 degrees for the sides.
This is a long way from the often recommended 6 or 8 degrees, but there seems to be no problem, no broken tail ends or anything.

But of course the famous "6 or 8 degrees" has always been nonsense. Many have worked this out for themselves and have boldly plumped for a single 7 degrees - well done!
You could have been even bolder and chosen any angle you like!
Approaching zero it becomes a box joint instead of dovetail, and more glue dependent. Approaching 30 then the corners become vulnerable. But the middle range is safe. Just pick your personal dovetail angle - any number from say 5 to 25.
I might go for 15 next time I do any. Why? dunno. It's the latitude of Dakar, if that's any use ;D

"So what about my expensive brass knob encrusted dovetail guide from lee & perrins, should I bin it?"
I suggest - pick your personal angle, and regrind to suit!

Any suggestions abt why my samples are so skewed?

cheers
Jacob

[andy king]

I would say they are skewed because they are hand cut without any bevel or guide. You don't need either, only a square to cut dovetails as one half becomes the template for the other. Square is critical, bevel not.
The guides or bevels are for uniformity, nothing else.

[johnboy]

Don't know where you get 6 or 8 degrees from. The numbers refer to the ratio of the slope not the angle. 1 in 6 is about 19 deg included angle and 1 in 8 is just over 14 degrees so the 17 degree average you have found is not far from 1 in 7!!! Looks like whoever made this decided to go for the middle ground as have many others (me included)

Very interesting thread. looking forward to seeing you put it all back together again.

John

[argus]

Oct 5, 2008 14:39:22 GMT johnboy said:

Don't know where you get 6 or 8 degrees from. The numbers refer to the ratio of the slope not the angle.

At last! The proper proportions.

.

[mrgrimsdale]

Oct 5, 2008 14:39:22 GMT johnboy said:

Don't know where you get 6 or 8 degrees from. The numbers refer to the ratio of the slope not the angle. 1 in 6 is about 19 deg included angle and 1 in 8 is just over 14 degrees so the 17 degree average you have found is not far from 1 in 7!!! Looks like whoever made this decided to go for the middle ground as have many others (me included)

Very interesting thread. looking forward to seeing you put it all back together again.

John

Oops yes but the argument stays the same! I was also thinking of the 24 deg angle which seems to work OK here, with a gradient approx 1 in 2.2.

I would say they are skewed because they are hand cut without any bevel or guide. You don't need either, only a square to cut dovetails as one half becomes the template for the other. Square is critical, bevel not.
The guides or bevels are for uniformity, nothing else.

That's what I thought at first, but they are all marked up carefully with a knife, including the skew. The included angle stays the same but the triangle is tilted.

cheers
Jacob

[mrgrimsdale]

Oct 5, 2008 14:39:22 GMT johnboy said:

Don't know where you get 6 or 8 degrees from. The numbers refer to the ratio of the slope not the angle. 1 in 6 is about 19 deg included angle and 1 in 8 is just over 14 degrees so the 17 degree average you have found is not far from 1 in 7!!! Looks like whoever made this decided to go for the middle ground as have many others (me included)

Very interesting thread. looking forward to seeing you put it all back together again.

John

Just checked again with my calculator - I was approximately right first time, more by luck than maths.
1/6 or 1/ 8 have slope of 9.5 and 7.1 deg
I was looking at an included angle of 35 deg. This gives an average angle of 17.5 with gradient 1/3.2 with a max (at 24 deg) of 1/2.2. Approx from 2 to 4 times as steep as 1/6 and 1/8
Or in other words: a gradient of from 1/2.2 (or zero) to 1/8 is OK. My arbitrary choice of 15 deg gives a gradient of 1/3.7, which turns out to be close to mid range!
Er, I might just check all that again


cheers
Jacob

[engineerone]

surely 1 in 8 gives you about 11 degrees, whilst 1 in 6 gives 15??

at least that is what my calculator suggests, maybe i can borrow hudson from dom to check ;D

paul

[mrgrimsdale]

Oct 5, 2008 20:42:20 GMT engineerone said:

surely 1 in 8 gives you about 11 degrees, whilst 1 in 6 gives 15??

at least that is what my calculator suggests, maybe i can borrow hudson from dom to check ;D

paul

arctan1/8 = 7.125016349 deg according to mine. If you count gradient as rise/run.
or arcsin1/8 = 7.180755781deg if you count gradient as opposite over hypotenuse.
arctan 1/6 = 9.462322208
arcsin 1/6 = 9.594068227
You need a new calculator Paul

cheers
Jacob

[engineerone]

being one of those who does finger maths

i figured that it is .125 of 90 degrees
or .166 of 90 degrees from where comes my figures.

paul

[mrgrimsdale]

So have you got a system then Paul? Are you going to tell us what it is, even though it doesn't work? ;D

cheers
Jacob