Which way would you orient grain for gluing up?

[Jim Kirkpatrick]

I'm face gluing some "2 by" stock to make some legs for a workbench. Which way would you orient the rings, A, B or C? And why?
EDIT: I'm using 8/4 Ash stock for what it's worth. I've really only edge-glued boards before and used to alternate rings up and down but then at a seminar, I asked Sam Maloof which way he edge-glued boards and he said he never paid attention, he glued them whichever looked best.

[Stephen Edwards]

That's a good question! Sorry, I don't have sound advice to offer. However, I like the looks of "A", for whatever that's worth. Probably, not much!

I'll keep an eye on this thread so that maybe I'll learn something, too.

[Glen Butler]

Interesting question, I have never thought about it before and maybe there is a technical reason to growth patterns that would provide an answer. I always orient the grain to what flows the best.

Option A seems like a good choice to me because so often I have seen center growth rings peel away, but this is more typical on kiln dried softwood.

[glenn bradley]

I would use "A" or a pleasingly oriented "C" for appearances sake. Structurally, if the wood is ready for use and the glue up is done properly I see no advantage to any combination. There is a camp that preaches alternating rings during panel glue-ups. I haven't heard or read of that philosophy being applied to posts. I haven't had any problems alternating or not alternating. If I had, maybe I wold join that camp. I had read enough from respected craftsman about choosing based on appearance and have done so without issue.

[Faust M. Ruggiero]

Since you are face gluing thick stock, it doesn't really matter. If you intend to plane them after gluing, orient the grain so you won't be planing against one and with the other. Disregard the direction of the annual rings. If you were edge gluing several of these together to make a table top, for instance, you might want to alternate the annular rings to balance the tendency to cup.
fmr

[Stephen Edwards]

..... There is a camp that preaches alternating rings during panel glue-ups. I haven't heard or read of that philosophy being applied to posts....I haven't had any problems alternating or not alternating

I used to be in that camp, too, because, well, that's what I had always heard was the proper way to do it. No more. Now, I glue up panels in whatever way the boards look better to my eye, with no problems thus far.

I left that camp because of a (gasp) mistake that I made when, by accident, I glued up a panel with a board turned the wrong way. Later, here on the forum I learned that there's another camp that says it doesn't matter which way the boards are oriented! Live and learn.

[Van Huskey]

Whatever looks best. I am a aesthetics first guy, I figure out how I want it to look like then figure a way to bend the wood to my will. In this case a standard glue up would be fine. For those that think this is a hamfisted way to deal with such a regal medium actually I am just helping the wood be what it always wanted to be...:p

[Chip Lindley]

Moisture content of construction lumber is always *Iffy*. For this reason, theoretically, safest would be *C*. Boards tend to cup exactly opposite the *smile* of the grain rings. If both boards are oriented as *C*, any cup would virtually equal in both boards, and the glue joint would not fail.

*A* will cup away from the glue joint, which could cause the outer edges to separate.

*B* will cup away from the center between boards, so as to create a void in the center.

This is a workbench of *2by* construction lumber. Not a furniture piece of nice hardwood. I wouldn't spend time obsessing.

I had such a problem with 8/4 white oak laminated to make a 6x6" newel post for a stair railing. The stock was air-dried and still a bit too moist. After laminating four perfectly jointed/planed boards, the edges separated as the stock dried. I had to *do surgery* and insert 3/4" strips wedged into routed grooves to *hide* the splits. The post had the *look* of laminated 4/4 stock, instead of laminated 8/4 stock.

[Darnell Hagen]

If you are using 2" X 4" stock and ripping it in half, fold it over and make a bookmatched face. Then choose which bookmatch looks nicer, A or B. Don't do C, especially if you can see the endgrain of the leg. Technically this is the better method, too, because of your gluejoint being stronger than the wood. The tensions will balance each other out, keeping your leg square.

Table tops will cup because of cellular distortion due to moisture. Do not worry about alternating rings. Glue it up to look good. This is how I lay them out-
http://thewayiwood.blogspot.com/2010/02/table-making-top.html

[Dan Forman]

Hey guys, just a reminder -- he said the stock is ASH, not construction softwood. I suppose then, the big question would be whether its air dried or kiln dried?

Also remember that this is for a leg, end grain won't show, it's strictly a matter of which would be the sturdiest if there is wood movement.

I'm curious about this too, as I'm starting my new workbench soon, have 8/4 air dried ash to work with.

Dan

[Norman Pyles]

I would just glue them up, and not worry about which way the rings are facing. Sam Maloof's advice would be good enough for me. :)

[Jim Kirkpatrick]

I would just glue them up, and not worry about which way the rings are facing. Sam Maloof's advice would be good enough for me. :)

Ahh....but that was for edge glued stock. This is face-glued.

Dan, the stock is kiln-dried. It's at 8% right now

[Mike Henderson]

For legs, I look at how the grain matches along the leg, and not how it "matches" at the end. I want the two pieces to flow together and not show an obvious line between the two halves. By trying different pieces I can usually come up with a good enough match that the glue line doesn't "shout".

Mike

[Norman Pyles]

Ahh....but that was for edge glued stock. This is face-glued.

Dan, the stock is kiln-dried. It's at 8% right now
I realize that, but fail to see a difference. They are both long grain. JMO

[Darnell Hagen]

Also remember that this is for a leg, end grain won't show


End grain shows on the ends of my trestles, as well as the through tenons that connect my front legs to my benchtop.

[Dan Forman]

End grain shows on the ends of my trestles, as well as the through tenons that connect my front legs to my benchtop.

...won't show...in most cases. :o

Dan

[Darnell Hagen]

...won't show...in most cases.


True. :)

Bookmatched end grain is a positive side effect of bookmatched side grain.

[Richard Dragin]

I would choose B than A but not C. With A and B the grain is bi-laterally symmetrical and any tendency to move will be counteracted by the opposing piece. The reason for B over A is aesthetic, especially if you were to carve or turn the piece.

[David DeCristoforo]

I'm going with "C" because the glue line will be less noticeable with the grain "flowing together". Structurally, with thick stock, any of the three would be OK.

[jim gossage]

A is the worst structurally because it recapitulates the structure of pith, which makes visible cracks more likely, including splits on the outside as mentioned earlier. B is best because any separation will occur inside and not be seen.

[Richard Dragin]

I thought my" bi-lateral symmetry" was highfalutin but "recapitulates the structure of pith" has me impressed!

[Norman Pyles]

I thought my" bi-lateral symmetry" was highfalutin but "recapitulates the structure of pith" has me impressed!
Good one.:D:cool::cool:

[Peter Quinn]

I'm going with "It doesn't make a rats behind either way" line of thinking. Its not for a top that i have to hand plane, I don't even care about grain orientation or tear out on the legs of a shop fixture. Maybe its because I spent my day chasing a 9 month old just learning to walk, but I'm in a "Just do it and see what happens" mood. I think as adults we often spend too much time analyzing every detail of a project not knowing which are important and wind up obsessed with minutia. I know I'm guilty of this. I'd do one of each and double the one you feel strongest about just to see what happens. Might be a good experiment.

[Dan Forman]

Interesting timing for this other thread to appear: Elm split! (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?t=133450)

Dan

[jim gossage]

Interesting timing for this other thread to appear: Elm split! (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?t=133450)

Dan

Interestingly, the third picture shows what looks like pith in the middle of the board!

[Mark Woodmark]

I would go with A. It balances out any cupping the boards may want to do and I feel the glue will be strong enough to hold. C may be stronger, but any wood movement will not be offset by the other board

[Richard M. Wolfe]

I haven't done a lot of gluing narrow thick stock but will go with the school of whatever looks best. Come to think of it, that's the way I make panels, too. :D

[Jim Kirkpatrick]

I went with "A". Time will tell, hopefully a long time

[John Harden]

Can't help you out from the picture as I'd need to see the wood. Obviously, it is much different from the wavy lines on the drawings.

Don't worry about alternating growth rings. You should be focusing on the appearance of the wood from the top. My recommendation is to orient the grain in a way that is pleasing to your eye. That's the challenge with woods like ash and the strong grain structure.

Regards,

John

[John Thompson]

A... as already stated... bow will occur toward the heart or pith. The pith should be cut out and not used. But... with that said, all 3 will work as you have 2" x approximately 30" of face glue and bow becomes a non issue IMO.

[David Prince]

Moisture content of construction lumber is always *Iffy*. For this reason, theoretically, safest would be *C*. Boards tend to cup exactly opposite the *smile* of the grain rings. If both boards are oriented as *C*, any cup would virtually equal in both boards, and the glue joint would not fail.

*A* will cup away from the glue joint, which could cause the outer edges to separate.

*B* will cup away from the center between boards, so as to create a void in the center.

This is a workbench of *2by* construction lumber. Not a furniture piece of nice hardwood. I wouldn't spend time obsessing.

I had such a problem with 8/4 white oak laminated to make a 6x6" newel post for a stair railing. The stock was air-dried and still a bit too moist. After laminating four perfectly jointed/planed boards, the edges separated as the stock dried. I had to *do surgery* and insert 3/4" strips wedged into routed grooves to *hide* the splits. The post had the *look* of laminated 4/4 stock, instead of laminated 8/4 stock.

I too agree with "C". If there was a guarantee that wood would never move, then any combination would work. But, we all know that wood moves. "C" compensates for this!

[Faust M. Ruggiero]

Peter,
That's called paralysis by analysis.
fmr

[J.R. Rutter]

This was a funny thread - everyone clear on what is best now?

General rule of thumb is that when looking at end grain:

moisture loss will make growth rings get straighter

moisture gain will make them curve more

Do you know what the MC is now vs where it is likely to go?

[Leigh Betsch]

I went with "A". Time will tell, hopefully a long time


Oh NO!!:eek:

Just joken ya!

[jim gossage]

I went with "A". Time will tell, hopefully a long time

Jim,
You'll probably be ok, especially if the wood was fully dried and acclimated to your shop, where I assume it will continue to stay. However, A is the pattern most likely to split if the wood dries further, especially hardwood. Softwood like pine is not as much of a problem because the softwood handles internal stresses better. For a nice discussion on wood movement in table legs, take a look at chapter 5 in the video "Wood science and design" by Hendrik Varju.

[Lee Schierer]

Since you are face gluing thick stock, it doesn't really matter. If you intend to plane them after gluing, orient the grain so you won't be planing against one and with the other. Disregard the direction of the annual rings. If you were edge gluing several of these together to make a table top, for instance, you might want to alternate the annular rings to balance the tendency to cup.
fmr

I'm with Faust, orient the pieces so the edge grains can be planed (jointed) without tearout. No matter how careful you are you will need to trim the glue up to get the edges perfect. Whether done by planer, jointer or hand having the grain running the same way on the edges of both pieces is important.

[Carol Czuk]

This is a very interesting post. Is it possible to repost the picture mentioned in the initial post. Also could not open pictures in Elm Split post. There is a lot of good info out there, but the older posts no longer show the pics.

[Matt Day]

Carol, first of all welcome to the forum. As you can see this thread is 10 years old so some members may not be participating anymore.

The picture in the first post is there, if you can’t see it you may be viewing in “mobile view” on a phone or tablet and need to switch to Full site (bottom of page, center).

The pics in the Elm Split were originally hosted by Photobucket, and they betrayed the internet and now ask for a ransom to post pics on a 3rd party’s site, so there are thousands of incomplete threads because of it. You can try to contact the person who posted the pictures, but I suggest sending him/her a Private Message.

Again, welcome and I hope you stick around.

Edit: and I bet the bench legs are doing just fine!

[Sebastien La Madeleine]

Actually you cant find a lot of good info on this topic in page 7 of this PDF https://www.fine-tools.com/pdf/roubo-hobelbank-bauplan-en.pdf
(https://www.fine-tools.com/pdf/roubo-hobelbank-bauplan-en.pdf)

[Kevin Beitz]

I would go with D.