Drawer narrower at back than front.

[baldpate]

Hi,

I've been commissioned by my daughter to make file suspension insert for a deep drawer in her traditional-style pedestal desk (it's a modern-ish reproduction, but decent quality I think). She wanted something which could be dropped-in and removed as required, rather than simply permanently attaching suspension runners to the drawer - a sort of rigid cage with runners at each side on the top. The width of the drawer is such that the tolerances are pretty fine. I've designed it allowing 1mm clearance either side of the insert.

Like an silly person, I only measured the internal width at the rear of the drawer, assuming that the sides would be parallel (the insert cage must, of course, be parallel). When as a check I came to dry-fit the cut pieces of the cage frame, I discovered that the drawer is tapered, being 2mm narrower at the back than at the front (drawer is about 31 cm from back to front). Fortunately, I had by chance taken my measurements from the narrow end, so no problem with the fit - just bit sloppier at the front than I expected.

I can see the point of tapering a drawer in this way (help avoid jamming?). My question is this: is this sort of taper normal on drawers of traditional construction? Or did I just get one that was made on a Friday ?

Regards

Chris

 

[Tony Spear]

Mark Ripley: http://www.mark-ripley.com/

Once told me it was, but I don't think he used tapers quite as big as 2mm. :wink:

 

[Teckel]

I worked in restoration and saw this alot. It would be just a gee hair smaller at the back than the front.

 

[moz]

On a traditional drawer, best to taper the opening but only about by 0.5 mm, usually achieved with a shoulder plane. The back and front of the drawer are dimensioned to fit the opening exactly. This way, the drawer is always snug at the front but without the problem of accumulated friction as the drawer enters. This is definitely not the same as tapering the drawer which results in a sloppy fit and jamming up.

John

 

[AndyT]

Yes it's traditional, but if the desk is a 'modernish reproduction' it might be made like my parents' old 1940s dressing table - the drawers were made full width at the front (so they looked right when closed) but the sides had been eased with a big belt sander so there was a distinct taper to them. They were all the same so I'm sure this was the factory method, not someone else modifying it later.

 

[baldpate]

Thanks everybody. The drawer is definitely machine made, so it looks as if it is deliberate. I don't have access to the rest of the drawers at the moment; when I do, I'll measure them too.

I rechecked the 'toe-in' after comments that it seemed large. It is definitely 2mm, although the drawer is 50cm front-to-back (not 31 as I wrongly stated in the opening post), which makes for a convergence of just over 0.1 degree on either side.

@AndyT : I think it might well be 40's or 50's, so the technique you describe might well have been used. Thanks

 

[woodbloke]

Normal practice in good quality work is to leave the back a fraction of a mm wider than the front - Rob

 

[Eric The Viking]

Normal practice in good quality work is to leave the back a fraction of a mm wider than the front - Rob

OK, Rob, I'll bite:

I'm mystified as to why - you can tell I don't make many chests of drawers!

Please can you explain?

Thanks,

E.

 

[woodbrains]

Hello,

Rob is quite correct, drawer pockets a hair wider at the back is good practice. Keep the drawer sides parallel in width to the front dimension and you will never have a binding drawer, but one that fits nicely into its front opening without being sloppy. Wider at the front openings will always be sloppy.

Mike.

 

[woodbloke]

Hello,

Rob is quite correct, drawer pockets a hair wider at the back is good practice. Keep the drawer sides parallel in width to the front dimension and you will never have a binding drawer, but one that fits nicely into its front opening without being sloppy. Wider at the front openings will always be sloppy.

Mike.

Beat me to it WB :lol: - Rob

 

[Eric The Viking]

Ah drawer pockets! It all makes sense now.

Thanks chaps.

E.

 

[Grahamshed]

It's amazing what you can learn ( and store away for future use ) on this forum. Note to self, read all posts even if the subject matter doesn't have immediate appeal.

 

[woodbrains]

Hello,

Now here is something to mess with your heads. (Some may have heard of this or do it, but I'll bet not many). I actually make drawer pockets wider at the back AND the drawers wider at the back, too. It is only fractional, I'll admit and it takes a little time to get spot on BUT, if you get the front of the drawer fitting beautifully to the front of the drawer opening and keep the back of the drawer a 'fist tapping' amount wider than the front opening, the drawers in use, will only come open about 2/3 to 3/4 of their length and then glide to a halt. You can never inadvertatly pull a drawer right from its pocket and have the contents fall out, all over the floor, and it is a bit of a conundrum when people first encounter it. The second bit, obviously just a fringe benefit to the intended purpose! :shock: (hammer)

Mike.