First attempt at all-M&T joinery

[scott vroom]

This is a follow up to a separate thread on alternative methods of M&T cutting. The pics below are right after removing the clamps.

For my first all-M&T project, 2 matching nightstands, I decided to use my old PC690 router with the plunge base and edge guide, and a Whiteside 3/8" spiral upcut bit. 14 blind tenon and 2 thru tenons on each piece.

I squared up the rounded corners on the thru's with a bench chisel. Kinda difficult to clean up those tiny corners....next time I'll stop the router further from the end, leaving enough wood to allow better control. My son suggested clamping boards at the corners such that the chisel is prevented from cutting outside the lines....I'll try that next time. The mortises are OK but there's definitely room for improvement.

[scott vroom]

I applied painter's tape to all joints....worked great, zero glue cleanup. For the 1-13/16 legs I face glued 3 boards and applied 1/8" veneer to hide the visible edges (project was inspired by my desire to use up QSWO from various cabinet jobs).

[scott vroom]

I used plans purchased from David Marks website. Well drawn except for one dimensional error that he confirmed.

I'm not sure I like his drawer design and that's what I'm stuck on now. He designed an all maple drawer box with a slightly wider/taller applied oak front. The maple drawer glides/runners stop the applied front. Seems to me it would be a whole lot easier to dove tail the oak front into the box assembly, and place stops at the rear of the runners....i.e. get rid of the applied front. Here's a pic showing the stand without any drawer elements. I'm looking for opinions on the best way to do the drawers.....focusing on applied front vs incorporated front.

[Peter Quinn]

Looks great Scott. I'd skip the applied front and go with an integral front, half blind dovetails, not sure why he's going applied there? Classic piece of furniture. Maybe trying to simplify fitting the drawer for the home audience?

[scott vroom]

Looks great Scott. I'd skip the applied front and go with an integral front, half blind dovetails, not sure why he's going applied there? Classic piece of furniture. Maybe trying to simplify fitting the drawer for the home audience?

Thanks Peter. It just seemed silly to assemble an entire piece of furniture without any mechanical fasteners, and then attach an applied drawer front with screws :o

I'm wondering if fitting the recessed drawer would actually be easier with an integrated front?

[John TenEyck]

Scott, that looks nice. You might want to change your glue-up sequence next time though. All those clamps give me a headache just thinking about how you did that and managed to get it done before the glue set up. I glue up the sides first as flat assemblies, whenever possible, and then connect the sides. Makes things pretty simple and calm. I think Peters got it right on the drawer, too, an integral front with HB DT's would be my choice as well. One hint I learned from a FWW article a couple of years ago. Fit the drawer front to the opening before building the drawer, then build the drawer. Final fitting is stupid simple if you do it that way.

John

[scott vroom]

John, great tip on fitting the drawer front before building the box....makes complete sense.

I used titebond 2 extended so had plenty of time to do a big-bang glue up. But as you mentioned, fitting all of those intersecting clamps was a chore. I shot pin nails into the apron tenons from the inside (out of view)...it really helped with alignment. My next project will be a dresser and I've already decided to glue up sub-assemblies, leaving a simpler final glue up.

[Prashun Patel]

A applied front would be easier if you find through dovetails easier than half blinds. I prefer the integral box too. With your craftsmanship, i would go for the integral. Nice work.

[Rick Johnston]

Scott, would you post a picture of veneer showing the edge of the veneer and not just the face. Curious how the veneer glue line looks. Tks

[scott vroom]

Scott, would you post a picture of veneer showing the edge of the veneer and not just the face. Curious how the veneer glue line looks. Tks

Rick, I shot these with late afternoon sun coming through the window....kinda weird coloring. This is a representative sampling of veneer glue lines. The glue line itself is virtually invisible, the "line" is from contrasting woods. In some cases the veneer edge blends perfectly with the face, in others it's more obvious. Again, I built this projects with scrap wood so limited ability to grain match. I oriented the legs so the best veneer sides facing front and at least one side. When I commit to another A&C style project (dresser) I'll probably purchase 8/4 for legs and not mess with the veneers.

[Rick Johnston]

Scott the veneer looks very good. When you call it veneer I assume this is stock you planed down to 1/8" ?

[scott vroom]

Scott the veneer looks very good. When you call it veneer I assume this is stock you planed down to 1/8" ?

Rick, that is correct. I started with surfaced 3/4" boards. ripped them in half on edge, leaving 2 ~1/4" boards. Ran them through the planner to get to 1/8". Face glued to the leg and clamped with scrap boards on either side to apply high psi pressure evenly, using pipe clamps alternating top-bottom. Trimmed the excess veneer with a utility knife (second most versatile tool in the world next to duct tape). Cleaned up with a flush trim bit. Poor man's 8/4 :o

[Mike Schuch]

Nice job Scott. The mortises might not be absolutely perfect but the minor flaws make them look like real mortises cut by a craftsman instead of something cut by a cnc machine. When looking at vintage furniture the mortises are never perfect... perfect only came into being when machines took over for craftsmen.

[Rod Sheridan]

Looks great Scott. I'd skip the applied front and go with an integral front, half blind dovetails, not sure why he's going applied there? Classic piece of furniture. Maybe trying to simplify fitting the drawer for the home audience?

Agreed............Rod.

[Rod Sheridan]

. When I commit to another A&C style project (dresser) I'll probably purchase 8/4 for legs and not mess with the veneers.

Hi Scott, I would advise against using 8/4 for the legs, you will not be happy with the grain pattern.

I either use a lock mitre joint on the legs, or the veneer method you used, however once I've glued the 1/8" veneer on the legs I joint and plane the legs to completed dimension so that the veneer is less than 1/16". It really hides the edge.

Your cabinet looks good, keep refining your technique, and definitely no applied drawer fronts in A&C furniture, hand cut half blind dovetails are much nicer.

If you don't mind some constructive criticism, in my opinion the through tenons are too long, and the bevel needs to be much blunter..........Regards, Rod.

[glenn bradley]

Looking good Scott. Nice job on the leg glue up to get that appearance. I too vote for inset drawers just from the point of appearance on a piece of this style. Half-blind DT's are not your only option; drawer-lock, sliding DT or pinned sides are some other options if you want to break away from the traditional.

[Prashun Patel]

I agree with Rod.
I made a Shaker table using QSWO, without giving thought to the grain pattern on the leg.

See how flatsawn juxtaposes to qs? (Sorry for the rotated pic). Not that anyone but woodworkers will notice, but I wish I had known better then.

[scott vroom]

Hi Scott, I would advise against using 8/4 for the legs, you will not be happy with the grain pattern.

I either use a lock mitre joint on the legs, or the veneer method you used, however once I've glued the 1/8" veneer on the legs I joint and plane the legs to completed dimension so that the veneer is less than 1/16". It really hides the edge.

Your cabinet looks good, keep refining your technique, and definitely no applied drawer fronts in A&C furniture, hand cut half blind dovetails are much nicer.

If you don't mind some constructive criticism, in my opinion the through tenons are too long, and the bevel needs to be much blunter..........Regards, Rod.

Hi Rod, the tenons protrude 5/16 and are beveled with a 45 degree angle bit w/bearing. How long do your tenons protrude, and at what angle do you bevel?

The veneer was an afterthought, if I use this method again I'll size the legs such that the veneer can be planned thinner (and less obvious).

I welcome any and all constructive criticism! This is my first attempt at furniture in many,many years....and my first attempt at M&T joinery. My hope is that when my grandchildren look at the furniture they won't say "Grandpa was a hack". Or at least be kind enough to lie :) :)

[scott vroom]

I agree with Rod.
I made a Shaker table using QSWO, without giving thought to the grain pattern on the leg.

See how flatsawn juxtaposes to qs? (Sorry for the rotated pic). Not that anyone but woodworkers will notice, but I wish I had known better then.

Thanks Prashtun. In the photo your tenon seems nearly flush with the leg face. How far do you extend your tenons? What process do you use to bevel, and at what angle?

I think you guys have it right on veneer rather than solid stock. Like Rod said, a 1/16 veneer is going to be difficult to detect.

[Kent A Bathurst]

How far do you extend your tenons? What process do you use to bevel, and at what angle?


I leave ~~ 1/16" - 3/32" of the flat sides protruding. The bevels are at about 30* via LA block plane. I use a test piece; when I get to the "Not bad - that'll do" point, off to the races with my sample and my LA block.

Scott - did you consider a thru-tenon on the wide stretcher? That is pretty common in the genre - I do it all the time. Key point - that is wide enough to make movement something to keep in mind - need an over-length mortise, pins in the middle, free-floating.

[Rod Sheridan]

Hi Rod, the tenons protrude 5/16 and are beveled with a 45 degree angle bit w/bearing. How long do your tenons protrude, and at what angle do you bevel?

The veneer was an afterthought, if I use this method again I'll size the legs such that the veneer can be planned thinner (and less obvious).

I welcome any and all constructive criticism! This is my first attempt at furniture in many,many years....and my first attempt at M&T joinery. My hope is that when my grandchildren look at the furniture they won't say "Grandpa was a hack". Or at least be kind enough to lie :) :)

LOL Scott, for years my kids called my Morris chairs "lawn furniture" confusing them with Adirondak chairs. Now that that they're buying their own furniture they realise how much that lawn furniture costs to buy.

The square part of my tenons protrude maybe only 1mm, just enough to clear the mortice and then a very small angle bevel of maybe 15 to 20 degrees is put on them with a block plane.

Regards, Rod.

[Prashun Patel]

My tenons are flush. I did not bevel. You can't tell, because I didn't use contrasting wedges, but those tenons are wedged. I just found it easier to plane everything flush.

[scott vroom]

My tenons are flush. I did not bevel. You can't tell, because I didn't use contrasting wedges, but those tenons are wedged. I just found it easier to plane everything flush.

The wedges are well camouflaged! Looks like a wide wedge near the top? I can't see any wedges near the bottom. Do you use any glue to hold the wedges, or just rely on pressure?

[scott vroom]

I'm planning to build the nightstand drawers with half blind DT's, with the integral oak front aligned flush with the box sides and bottom. I figure if I first cut the drawer front to fit the opening, and build the box to fit the front, the recess fit should be relatively simple, no?

I'm stuck on best practices for the wooden slides/glides. I've looked at several antique pieces in my home and it seems a simple rectangular frame installed flush with the top of the lower front apron was a common approach. With a stop applied at the rear. Some designs have glides above the drawer as well, others not. I've searched Google for design ideas/techniques and have come up empty. Any thoughts/tips are greatly appreciated.

[Prashun Patel]

I used glue. The camouflage was unintentional. Another 'if I had known then what I know now' moment. Go through all that trouble, and nobody can tell ;). The bottom one's there too.
The times I do bevel my through tenons, I just use a block plane. I have to come in from either side to avoid blowing out the corner and also to achieve a consistent bevel. I do the long sides first, then the narrow ones. It never looks perfect, but that's part of the charm. Right? Right? (crickets chirp.)

Regarding your drawer runner question, I wrestle with this on each project too. I've done it all 3 ways (drawer-in-a-box, side runners, bottom runner).

The bottom runner gives good action for me on a wide but short (height) drawer. The side runners give good action on tall, narrow drawers. The drawer in a box is easiest to make, and what I've usually done on end tables with short, relatively small drawers. But on pieces with multiple drawers, it has just been trickier to remove all the slop. A drawer that moves in and out without any wiggle is really a thing of beauty to me. I'll tell you when I get there.

[scott vroom]

Regarding your drawer runner question, I wrestle with this on each project too. I've done it all 3 ways (drawer-in-a-box, side runners, bottom runner).

The bottom runner gives good action for me on a wide but short (height) drawer. The side runners give good action on tall, narrow drawers. The drawer in a box is easiest to make, and what I've usually done on end tables with short, relatively small drawers. But on pieces with multiple drawers, it has just been trickier to remove all the slop. A drawer that moves in and out without any wiggle is really a thing of beauty to me. I'll tell you when I get there.

Prashun, I'm trying to translate and visualize "drawer-in-a-box, side runners, bottom runner". Let me take a swing at it:

drawer-in-a-box: side and bottom glides that are precisely aligned with the legs and lower front apron. They simply act as a box to receive the drawer?

side runners: I believe this involves side mounted dado and corresponding strip glued to the drawer side?

bottom runner: Same as side runner except a single bottom mounted dado and guide. Seems this style would have to be combined with side mounted runners, similar to drawer in a box?

This is typical of me....I start a project without a fully thought through plan on all details. The nightstand plan I purchased had an applied drawer face and I decided yesterday, after building the 2 nightstand cabs, that I wanted a more traditional design with an integrated drawer front.

[Kent A Bathurst]

I'm planning to build the nightstand drawers with half blind DT's, with the integral oak front aligned flush with the box sides and bottom. I figure if I first cut the drawer front to fit the opening, and build the box to fit the front, the recess fit should be relatively simple, no?

I'm stuck on best practices for the wooden slides/glides. I've looked at several antique pieces in my home and it seems a simple rectangular frame installed flush with the top of the lower front apron was a common approach. With a stop applied at the rear. Some designs have glides above the drawer as well, others not. I've searched Google for design ideas/techniques and have come up empty. Any thoughts/tips are greatly appreciated.


I follow your plan re: inset drawers. Make the case first, then make the drawer to fit "reality", not my original drawings. I make it tight - REAL tight - and use Mr LN to work out the details after it is built.

The drawer components you are talking about are called "runners" [drawer bottoms] and "kickers" [drawer tops]. TYpically, they look like angle iron, made out of wood. A shortened "L". That lets the drawer sit on the runners, and stay in-line because of the sides of the runners. The kickers keep the drawer from going nose-down as it exits the case..leave a gap between the drawer carcass and the kickers - 1/16" - 1/8". THe sides of the kickers also keep the drawer in line.

However - it seems to me that in many cases, the kickers are not "L" shaped - they are just sticks of wood on top, and the runners' sides handle the alignment

In the front of the case, the runners and kickers are attached - dovetails are cool - to the horizontal frame parts above and below the drawer. IF you don't have a horizontal piece above the drawer [the table top is right there] then the table top is your kicker.

[scott vroom]

Thanks Kent. Good description, and after staring at the plans for the last 30 minutes I believe that is the same approach used by the designer.

[John TenEyck]

A couple more options with the legs Scott. If you go the veneer route, if you route a bevel on the edges just about equal to the thickness of the veneer it disappears. If you want to use solid 8/4 stock, use rift sawn; it will look the same on all faces. Or for the true Stickley look, lock mitered parts around a square core. Never tried it, but it looks really cool. I wouldn't do that, however, unless I planned to have the tops of the legs visible to show it off.

John

[scott vroom]

A couple more options with the legs Scott. If you go the veneer route, if you route a bevel on the edges just about equal to the thickness of the veneer it disappears. If you want to use solid 8/4 stock, use rift sawn; it will look the same on all faces. Or for the true Stickley look, lock mitered parts around a square core. Never tried it, but it looks really cool. I wouldn't do that, however, unless I planned to have the tops of the legs visible to show it off.

John

Thanks John. I'm gonna stick with veneer on the next project, I like the idea of softening the edges to mask the veneer edge. The true Stickley look just isn't in my playbook yet....I'm still in the shallow end with water wings :o

[Prashun Patel]

You are correct on all counts.

A center slide isn't intended to bear the weight of the drawer; the side runners do that, so you are correct. I agree that the 'box' really means two 'C' shaped brackets on either side of the drawer (a doubler, kicker, and runner on each side)

[scott vroom]

Assuming you want to maintain a 1/16 gap around all 4 sides of the recessed drawer front, how do you achieve that on the drawer front bottom. Do you mount the bottom runners 1/16 vertically proud of the lower apron (in my design a 3/4" square apron)? Or do you mount the integrated drawer front 1/16 up from the drawer sides? I'm trying to understand how you achieve this gap when gravity is working against you. Another thought is adding 1/16 veneers to the drawer side bottoms? Sorry for being anal, just trying to avoid unpleasant gotchas later.

[Kent A Bathurst]

Do you mount the bottom runners 1/16 vertically proud of the lower apron (in my design a 3/4" square apron)?

Occam's Razor wins again.

And then, I use Mr LA Block Plane on the front inch or so to put a shallow "slope" in the runner, so it dives just below the apron. If I ever take the drawer all the way out, I don't want to hit a ledge on the way back in.

[scott vroom]

Kent, so you're saying you DO mount the runners a bit proud of the lower apron so that when the drawer is closed there is a gap between the drawer front bottom and the top face of the apron?

Bonus points for making the connection between my question and Occam's Razor.:confused:

[Kent A Bathurst]

Kent, so you're saying you DO mount the runners a bit proud of the lower apron so that when the drawer is closed there is a gap between the drawer front bottom and the top face of the apron?

Bonus points for making the connection between my question and Occam's Razor.:confused:

Yes. Sorry. Somewhat obscure answer - made sense to me as I typed it, but not so much in retrospect.

Occam's Razor [oversimplifying] - the simplest solution to a problem is usually the correct one, so......... Mount the runners proud of the rail. You nailed it on your first swing.

[Rod Sheridan]

Thanks Kent. Good description, and after staring at the plans for the last 30 minutes I believe that is the same approach used by the designer.

Scott, I make the rnners and kickers "L" shaped.

Not required probably, however it's how I do it.

The runners are a bit higher than the opening to yield a consistent gap around the drawer front..........Rod.

[Prashun Patel]

While it's not optimal, I tend to mill my drawers a shade snugger to the gap I want. You can always joint off a smidge from the drawer bottom to fix imperfections on any side. This allows you to fit the box to the opening perfectly and evenly on all sides regardless of very minor imperfections in measurements or consistency of the opening.

[John TenEyck]

Scott, Bill Hylton's book or others might prove very helpful: http://www.amazon.com/Illustrated-Cabinetmaking-Construct-Furniture-Woodworker/dp/1565233697/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1429108802&sr=8-3&keywords=cabinet+making+books

John

[scott vroom]

While it's not optimal, I tend to mill my drawers a shade snugger to the gap I want. You can always joint off a smidge from the drawer bottom to fix imperfections on any side. This allows you to fit the box to the opening perfectly and evenly on all sides regardless of very minor imperfections in measurements or consistency of the opening.

That makes sense. Prashun, what I was asking for is your method of creating the gap between the drawer front bottom and the top face of the lower apron. Unless the runners are set higher than the lower apron the integral drawer front will sit directly on the apron with no gap. Kent and Rod both set the runners slightly higher, do you also use this method or do you take another approach.

[Prashun Patel]

I mount the runners a little higher, but I err on the lower side of that, and then do my final trimming off the bottom of the drawer front. The reason is that I just find it hard to mount the two runners on each side exactly coplanar, which they must be in order to get that lower front gap even. This is just my cheat to avoid having to worry too much about the mounting of the runners. I bet there are better methods.

I am really partial to this method because I have a decent router table set up that allows me to joint smidges off with very good accuracy. When I say 'trim' I'm really making a rabbet on the front lip. So the drawer sides end up proud of (lower than) the bottom of the front's bottom.

I don't think you'll have the same embarrassing problems I had; you're more thorough, plan well, and seem to execute very well - even the first time. But here's why I do this:

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?221591-Planing-drawers&highlight=

[Kent A Bathurst]

[QUOTE=Prashun Patel;2405574 I bet there are better methods.[/QUOTE]

No - there are different methods - none is inherently better, IMO.


One tip to file away in the memory banks:

Whenever you travel, "forget" to turn in the key cards at the hotel. And - no - that is not out of bounds for the hotels............in fact, if you get low, you can ask at the front desk if you can have any old ones no longer in use, and they will look at you weird and handl you a stack out of the new box. Or, have you parent's favorite son - the older brother who is a commercial pilot - send you an envelope full every month.

That system, across all brands that I have tried, uses card stock that is consistently 0.030 - thirty thou. Or, roughly 1/32".

You can use 'em stock size, or cut 'em with scissors / carton knife to fit to size, etc..

With respect to this topic - stack two slices [~ 1/16"], set them on top of the front apron, and use a straight edge and spring clip clamp to hold it all in line as you set the final height of the runner.

I use these cards as shims to position inset doors, etc. The old saw used to be "use dimes" - and I used to have a jar full. Spent those on beer, and use 3 stacked key cards instead.

[scott vroom]

Great discussion. It's the subtle little stuff that trips me up, I really appreciate you guys sharing the tips.

[Chris Friesen]

Hi Scott, I would advise against using 8/4 for the legs, you will not be happy with the grain pattern.

Might be able to make it work if you can find stock with the growth rings at 45 degrees or so...get nice straight grain down the legs with similar patterns on all sides.

[scott vroom]

Might be able to make it work if you can find stock with the growth rings at 45 degrees or so...get nice straight grain down the legs with similar patterns on all sides.

That would be the sweet spot for rift sawn, correct?

[scott vroom]

Hey all,

I had to focus on other projects this past week (dad-daughter refinishing...fun!), but am now back to the nightstands. I decided on integrated drawers with 1/2" maple on 3 sides and 3/4" oak on the front, all blind dovetails. I got lucky on the first drawer fitting very nicely on first attempt (in the pic the runners aren't in yet...I'm supporting the drawer with my right hand). I've built the runners/kickers and plan to attach the runners with o'sized screw holes to allow for final fit tweaking. I don't have a good small plane yet so hopefully my idea will work out. How much should I plan on spending on a quality small plane suitable for fine tuning drawers etc? Brand/model recommendations?

[Rod Sheridan]

Hi Scott, I use a #3 and a low angle block plane for drawers.

Try the Lee Valley one below for a possible choice

http://www.leevalley.com/en/Wood/page.aspx?p=47881&cat=1,41182,41189&ap=1

Your drawer would look much nicer in my opinion with smaller pins, it really is worth doing the dovetails by hand for this sort of drawer.

Your nightstand is coming along nicely..............Regards, Rod.

[scott vroom]

Hi Scott, I use a #3 and a low angle block plane for drawers.

Try the Lee Valley one below for a possible choice

http://www.leevalley.com/en/Wood/page.aspx?p=47881&cat=1,41182,41189&ap=1




Your drawer would look much nicer in my opinion with smaller pins, it really is worth doing the dovetails by hand for this sort of drawer.

Your nightstand is coming along nicely..............Regards, Rod.


Rod, thanks for the link and the suggestions. I've never learned hand made dovetails, instead I use a PC jig. It came with a small pin template, I may try it out on the other nightstand drawer.

I'm thinking if I take my bench chisel and kinda gouge those nice, clean DT's it'll look handmade? :D

Wow....those LV planes are pricey!! I was also looking at Lie-Nielsen's low angle block plane. At $115 it's quite a bit less expensive, but I must admit the Veritas plane looks to be more substantial, maybe better engineered.

[Prashun Patel]

Scott, LN and LV sell 2 low angle block plane styles: adjustable mounth and smaller, non-adjustable mouth. LV's version of the one you saw at LN for $115 is called an 'Apron Plane'.

If all you need to do at this point is flush up dovetails, then I suggest you just use sandpaper for now.

You should really try the 2 styles (if not the 4 different models from both makers) to determine what's ergonomically right for you in a block plane.

I am partial to the apron plane size (I have both the LN and Veritas versions; they're both wonderful) because I have smaller hands. I also have a smaller smoothing plane (#3) which can be used like a 2-handed, large block plane in some cases, so I don't miss not having a 60 1/2 size block (like the one in the LV link you have below). Others who go straight from a block to a #4 might prefer the larger, adjustable mouth style block.

[Kent A Bathurst]

I agree with Prashun - generally spe3aking.

I lke the #3 for this type of work - teh Goldilocks plane - not too big, not too small.

But - I also use a block plane.

Got 4 of them, for no reason other than I have 4. But they are all keepers. LN Std Angle adj mouth; Ln skew; Keen Kutter K220, and..........

If I could have just one - it would absolutely be the LN LA Rabbet Block. Too many uses not to have this one. Think beyond the current drawer project............

buck-seventy-five.

https://www.lie-nielsen.com/product/block-planes/rabbet-block-plane-w-nicker?node=4072