Oh dear, spot the deliberate mistake

[Graham Orm]

Peter Follansbee showing how 'not' to do it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1bo6NVYCc0

 

[shed9]

is it the use of plate glass?

 

[AndyT]

And your point is...?

Presumably you mean the way he over cut the right hand end. I think that was so obviously an error that he decided nobody would need to have it explained.

Cutting up against glass while giving a running commentary is going to be considerably harder than just cutting a mortice in the ordinary run of work.

 

[Spindle]

Should be using a Domino ?? :-" :-"

 

[Grahamshed]

Did I miss something somewhere ? I was expecting the glass to break

 

[John15]

Paul Sellers has a video giving a side view of a mortice being cut, but I think he uses a sheet of perspex rather than glass.
John

 

[Graham Orm]

He was levering heavily against the shoulders of the mortice to the point that the one on the left was rounded.

 

[shed9]

And I thought I was picky!

 

[Reggie]

Paul Sellers has a video giving a side view of a mortice being cut, but I think he uses a sheet of perspex rather than glass.
John

Nope, Paul Sellers uses plate too, the purpose is to show the method, it's up to the user to know when they're within their limits

 

[Grahamshed]

He was levering heavily against the shoulders of the mortice to the point that the one on the left was rounded.

Oh, ok.

 

[mtr1]

I believe his mortice matches perfectly what I have seen on 300/400 year old chests, they seemed to still be holding together well despite being the original flat pack furniture. I have made/restored chests such as this and it wouldn't make a jot of difference if the top of the mortice was rounded or perfect. I have restored furniture in the past and have had to pull apart perfectly good strong joints, but when uncovered they don't always look perfect despite holding together rather well.

Try to be less anal about woodworking and don't take it so seriously, our ancestors didn't and their furniture is still around.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[Sgian Dubh]

He was levering heavily against the shoulders of the mortice to the point that the one on the left was rounded.

That's not a mistake, it's standard procedure and fits in with long established patterns for the M&T. The bruised corner of the mortice is covered by the shoulder of the tenoned member. If there was a groove to be worked later to accept a panel, which is quite possible in the case of a panelled chest, the bruising would be removed as the slit is worked.

Indeed, it's rare to see an M&T without shoulders of one sort or another because the shoulders add overall strength and integrity to the joint. The most common form of shoulder-less M&T is the bare faced M&T, and you'll sometimes see structures like gates where the rail goes straight into a mortice without a shoulder on the end of the rail. But these are usually intermediate rails with structure taken care of (hopefully) elsewhere with fully shouldered M&Ts, often supplemented by drawbored dowels (trenails) or with wedges. Slainte.

 

[Graham Orm]

He was levering heavily against the shoulders of the mortice to the point that the one on the left was rounded.

That's not a mistake, it's standard procedure and fits in with long established patterns for the M&T. The bruised corner of the mortice is covered by the shoulder of the tenoned member. If there was a groove to be worked later to accept a panel, which is quite possible in the case of a panelled chest, the bruising would be removed as the slit is worked.

Indeed, it's rare to see an M&T without shoulders of one sort or another because the shoulders add overall strength and integrity to the joint. The most common form of shoulder-less M&T is the bare faced M&T, and you'll sometimes see structures like gates where the rail goes straight into a mortice without a shoulder on the end of the rail. But these are usually intermediate rails with structure taken care of (hopefully) elsewhere with fully shouldered M&Ts, often supplemented by drawbored dowels (trenails) or with wedges. Slainte.

Yes agreed, just looks 'rough' to watch as if he's butchering it without a care.

 

[Halo Jones]

What about through tenons? You would not want a rounded corner on side of the mortice that was visible....

 

[Alex H]

If there's any mistake, it's that beard :shock:

 

[Sgian Dubh]

Yes agreed, just looks 'rough' to watch as if he's butchering it without a care.

So now you seem to be saying there was no "deliberate mistake" in the morticing technique displayed. The thread appears to have been given a misleading title don't you think? Slainte.

 

[toolsntat]

What about through tenons? You would not want a rounded corner on side of the mortice that was visible....

Exactly, which is why the main levering out work should be done before final chiselling to the size lines.
Thought this was how all the books show you as a beginner and if they don't there wrong or assume you are already proficient at it :wink:

Andy

 

[Sgian Dubh]

What about through tenons? You would not want a rounded corner on side of the mortice that was visible....

There's no need to lever from the outside because you're cutting into the existing mortice which will have been pretty deeply excavated from the other side, so no bruising or crushing of the outside corners should be necessary. Slainte.

 

[bugbear]

He was levering heavily against the shoulders of the mortice to the point that the one on the left was rounded.

That's not a mistake, it's standard procedure and fits in with long established patterns for the M&T. The bruised corner of the mortice is covered by the shoulder of the tenoned member. If there was a groove to be worked later to accept a panel, which is quite possible in the case of a panelled chest, the bruising would be removed as the slit is worked.

Thanks for that; most interesting as an option (options are good, and choosing between them interesting).

BugBear

 

[Grahamshed]

:lol: (hammer)