Solid wood panel construction

[Sgian Dubh]

Some visitors to the forum may find my discussion on solid wood panel construction useful or helpful in their work. Here is a link to it. http://www.richardjonesfurniture.com/Articles/panel-glue-ups/panel-glue-ups.html

What you will find is an edited and truncated version of a larger illustrated text I have created that is intended for print publication at some point in the future. Slainte.

 

[woodchip]

Very interesting and informative Richard, thanks for the article.

 

[newt]

Thanks Richard

 

[Digit]

Just to add my three pennorth, and ask the opinion of others.
I orientate the grain the same direction in each board. I didn't use to till I French polished a top. The undulations caused by the alternate orientation showed up horribly due to the reflection from the finish.

Roy.

 

[curlywol]

Excellent website Richard
I appreciate you making your articles available.

John

 

[BradNaylor]

Interesting stuff, and confirms much of my own experience.

Although I use a lot of veneered MDF in my work I tend to glue up solid wood panels for the tops of cabinets etc.

I favour arranging the boards in a glue-up purely on the basis of aesthetics and ignoring the orientation of growth rings. I do try to select quarter sawn(ish) boards for this job, however.

I have not experienced the phenominum of slippage between boards in subsequent use, but after reading about it here I will always use biscuits in future, set low down to reduce the possibility of their presence becoming visible - again something I have heard of but never experienced.

Cheers
Dan

 

[Paul Chapman]

set low down to reduce the possibility of their presence becoming visible - again something I have heard of but never experienced.

In my experience, this effect is most pronounced when using materials such as Contiboard, where the substrate is chipboard (which is full of small holes); less so where the substrate is MDF; and even less so with solid wood. But always best to wait a few days for the moisture to even out.

Great article, Richard.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[Sgian Dubh]

I have not experienced the phenominum of slippage between boards in subsequent use, but after reading about it here I will always use biscuits in future, Dan

Or you could just use a non-creeping glue, eg, polyurethane, Scotch glue, urea formaldehyde, epoxy, etc. Slainte.

 

[Jake]

I have not experienced the phenominum of slippage between boards in subsequent use, but after reading about it here I will always use biscuits in future, Dan

Or you could just use a non-creeping glue, eg, polyurethane, Scotch glue, urea formaldehyde, epoxy, etc. Slainte.

'PVA' is a bit broad-brush, these days. Creep is only a real-life concern (at least in cabinetry) with the non cross-linking types, surely?

 

[Sgian Dubh]

'PVA' is a bit broad-brush, these days. Creep is only a real-life concern (at least in cabinetry) with the non cross-linking types, surely?

Creep is creep. I have seen it occur in different forms in all the PVA types, cross linking or not, as well as aliphatic resin emulsions.

The term cabinetry is similarly a broad brush or general term; certainly there are situations where creep is unlikely to manifest itself, but one of the more common forms of creep, but fortunately reasonably limited, in the vast range of 'cabinetry' is the row-of-pimples phenomenom. Slainte.

 

[BradNaylor]

Or you could just use a non-creeping glue, eg, polyurethane, Scotch glue, urea formaldehyde, epoxy, etc. Slainte.

OK. Fizzy glue it is, then!

Dan

 

[woodbloke]

'PVA' is a bit broad-brush, these days. Creep is only a real-life concern (at least in cabinetry) with the non cross-linking types, surely?

Creep is creep. I have seen it occur in different forms in all the PVA types, cross linking or not, as well as aliphatic resin emulsions.

The term cabinetry is similarly a broad brush or general term; certainly there are situations where creep is unlikely to manifest itself, but one of the more common forms of creep, but fortunately reasonably limited, in the vast range of 'cabinetry' is the row-of-pimples phenomenom. Slainte.

:? row of pimples...never heard of that one Richard...any examples? A flexible glue is desirable in some applications. Peters always advocated a PVA glue rather than one that set glass hard for chair making. I usually use a PVA of some denomination and have never found 'creep' to be much a problem though I'd never use it for a laminated structure - Rob

 

[Sgian Dubh]

... row of pimples...never heard of that one Richard...any examples? Rob

I have tried photographing the phenomenom two or three times over the last couple of years Rob, but without great success. The pimples in each case have been too small to really register even with a macro lens and good lighting.

However, now you know about it you'll recognise it when you feel it; and even if you don't your customers will, and they'll be on the phone pronto for you to fix it, ha, ha. Slainte.

 

[OPJ]

Excellent article, thanks for sharing.

Towards the end of the article you suggest using white spirit to wet the timber so you can get an idea of what it will look like before polishing. I assume this is because, unlike water, it won't raise the grain?

 

[Jake]

'PVA' is a bit broad-brush, these days. Creep is only a real-life concern (at least in cabinetry) with the non cross-linking types, surely?

Creep is creep. I have seen it occur in different forms in all the PVA types, cross linking or not, as well as aliphatic resin emulsions.

The BS is difficult to access as ever, so I've never read it - but I assumed that the manufacturers boasts of BS4071 'sustained load' compliance was meaningful. Is it puff(i.e they don't really comply), or is that part of the BS inadequate?

The term cabinetry is similarly a broad brush or general term.

True - generalisations have their uses. I was excluding structural uses.

 

[Sgian Dubh]

The BS is difficult to access as ever, so I've never read it - but I assumed that the manufacturers boasts of BS4071 'sustained load' compliance was meaningful. Is it puff(i.e they don't really comply), or is that part of the BS inadequate?

Jake, I read BS4071 some years ago. I don't exactly recall the conditions required to meet the standard.

However, when reading such things it's my experience that you have to look out for the key words and take note of them and their meaning. As I recall the key words are 'creep resistance'. It does not say creep proof. If the standard required that a glue is creep proof then that's exactly what it must be.

In other words, all those glues that meet BS4071 are creep resistant. That means they do actually creep, but to do so certain conditions have to be met.

At least, that's the way I understand it. It's like wood finishes. There are no common ones I can think of that are water-proof; they are all water resistant, and some are more water resistant than others. If there was such a thing as a water proof finish then if we used it properly we could say goodbye to expansion and contraction of wood as atmospheric RH and temperatures change over the seasons.

I might be right in thinking you have a legal background. If that's the case I'm guessing you enjoy teasing the subtleties out of what is said or written, and possibly even turning what was meant by the author or speaker into something else entirely, perhaps to your advantage, ha, ha. Slainte.

 

[Sgian Dubh]

... you suggest using white spirit to wet the timber so you can get an idea of what it will look like before polishing. I assume this is because, unlike water, it won't raise the grain?

Correct. Alcohol or naptha also work. It's not a perfect way to judge final appearance or spot flaws, but it can help. Slainte.

 

[BradNaylor]

... you suggest using white spirit to wet the timber so you can get an idea of what it will look like before polishing. I assume this is because, unlike water, it won't raise the grain?

Correct. Alcohol or naptha also work. It's not a perfect way to judge final appearance or spot flaws, but it can help. Slainte.

It's also a good way of seeing if there is any glue left lurking in the grain. It's very annoying to have to strip off a coat of lacquer for the sake of a spot of glue.

I tend to use cellulose thinners because that's what I have lots of.

Dan

 

[Jake]

The BS is difficult to access as ever, so I've never read it - but I assumed that the manufacturers boasts of BS4071 'sustained load' compliance was meaningful. Is it puff(i.e they don't really comply), or is that part of the BS inadequate?

As I recall the key words are 'creep resistance'. It does not say creep proof....

In other words, all those glues that meet BS4071 are creep resistant. That means they do actually creep, but to do so certain conditions have to be met.

All fair comment. My question was genuine, though. It may just be that the standard is garbage (must not creep more than 10cm per hour under a load of one ounce). From the meagre gleamings available online, I gathered that the creep resistance was in context of structural loads. And, manufacturers and sales people are way better than lawyers at distorting words (our distortions cannot, professionally, be lies).

I might be right in thinking you have a legal background. If that's the case I'm guessing you enjoy teasing the subtleties out of what is said or written, and possibly even turning what was meant by the author or speaker into something else entirely, perhaps to your advantage, ha, ha. Slainte.

I don't know that legalism really comes into it much - it's more academic curiosity, and attitude, I think. Teacher, justify thyself!

if the legal stuff does come into it, I think the only relevance is that in every case I deal with, there are at least two experts at the peaks of their professions on each side, asserting often totally opposing views with complete (but absolutely conflicting) confidence, especially before the real questioning starts.

I'm certainly not trying to twist your words, as you say. I am testing the basis of the things that you assert as fact - as a teacher in higher education you mustn't take offence at that, I would think.

 

[Sgian Dubh]

All fair comment. My question was genuine, though. It may just be that the standard is garbage (must not creep more than 10cm per hour under a load of one ounce). From the meagre gleamings available online, I gathered that the creep resistance was in context of structural loads. And, manufacturers and sales people are way better than lawyers at distorting words (our distortions cannot, professionally, be lies).

I don't believe the standard is garbage from what I recall of my reading of it some time ago. My memory of the details is suspect now, but as far as I recall it simply sets out standards of creep resistance under specific conditions. Meet those conditions and the creep that does occur is 'acceptable', whatever that means.

What I am saying is that I have seen creep of one sort or another in all those glue formulations. If you asked me to produce the evidence tomorrow I could not for I did not keep documentary evidence, eg, photographs, dates, times, assembly, load conditions, etc. Generally I was more concerned with dealing with the problem, fixing it, moving on and getting the project to the customer-- getting my money.

I don't know that legalism really comes into it much - it's more academic curiosity, and attitude, I think. Teacher, justify thyself!

I'm certainly not trying to twist your words, as you say. I am testing the basis of the things that you assert as fact - as a teacher in higher education you mustn't take offence at that, I would think.

In this case I was not implying that you were twisting my words; my comment was intended as a joke, hence the ha, ha at the end. I use text to indicate humour for I just won't use those emoticon things.

I welcome interesting and intelligent questions in response to something I have said or written. They cause me to better justify something I have said with further evidence, or new and better evidence to support my stance. I often find the learners I teach ask supplementary questions-- you are not in that category of course. Many times the question is due to the learner missing a key point in the thread of knowledge, and informing or reminding them of that key point solves the problem. In other cases the question throws up an interesting angle that causes me to modify whatever I've been saying in the past to something that includes a better explanation. Slainte.