Edge Joints - Would y'all please explain

[Curt Putnam]

My remarks pertain solely to edge joints - long grain to long grain. Assertion: the wood of an edge joint will fail before modern glues using properly prepared edges.

Question:
I read a lot posts saying that this or that technique will strengthen the joint. If you do increase strength, the wood will still fail because you can't make the wood stronger than the wood. I also assert that anything you do to the edge joint can only make it weaker or result in no strength gain.

Is my belief wrong? If so, please explain.

Thanks, Curt

[Wayne Lomman]

Curt, I don't fully agree with your original assertion. There is a huge variation in the quality of glues within each glue classification. The common pva is an example. This means that there are plenty of modern glues that are perfectly happy to fail before the timber.

If you are referring to outright mechanical strength, a good glue on a fine sawn or coarse sanded edge with no other jointing will be as strong are required. This is open to debate and I await the howls of anguish at the idea of gluing an unplanned edge. I should add that the sanding of an edge is a precision operation using no finer than 80 grit and a sanding technique that does not roll the edges of the work piece.

If you are in doubt about the quality of the glue in use, edge profiling to increase the surface area will improve joint strength. I have a 40 year old coffee table that is an example of this. Every joint failed after about 5 years apart from the top which has very deep zigzag joints. Cheers

[Jim Koepke]

Some like to do what is called a sprung joint. This takes a few thousandths from the center of boards joined in a panel. The idea is as the wood moves it will be less likely to split.

I often use a tongue and groove arrangement. The idea is it has more glued surface area than a straight joint.

jtk

[Frederick Skelly]

Curt,
I'm not 100% sure I get your question, but here are a couple sorta relevant thoughts, FWIW.

1. A while back, I ran two pine boards across the jointer, then edge glued them with regular old white elmers glue. I let it sit a week. Then I put two 2x4s under the glued up board such that the glue joint was in the middle of the span and parallel to the 2x4's. Then I hit the joint with a small sledgehammer. The wood broke, not the joint. I dont know much about types of glue. But for white glue, I think your original assertion is correct. (Of course, this wasnt a statistical sample :D )

2. I'm speculating here, so I could be wrong. But something Wayne said struck me. If you reinforce the joint with a biscuit, domino, dowell, etc you are increasing the surface are of the joint. I suspect that reinforcing the joint this way might be somewhat like edge gluing two thicker pieces of wood. For example, using biscuits on an edge glued 3/4" panel might be as strong as gluing a 7/8" panel without biscuits. If that were true, you have made the wood in the 3/4" panel (functionally) stronger by reinforcing it. (But you added more glue, too so it may be a wash. I dont know.)

Let's wait for our engineer friends to weigh in here - they should know for sure.

[Brent Cutshall]

Forgive me if I don't get the subject here. I mostly use the desired joint then a small amount of glue just for the sake of it. I figure no matter how strong the glue is, it's still on wood. Glue helps, but the wood is still holding most of the weight. It's like if you put a steel screw into a board. The screw is undeniably stronger than the wood, but the grip is still only as strong as the wood holding the screw.

[Richard Line]

My experience (limited) is that a decent glue joint will be stronger than the wood. So, gluing the joints would seem to make the panel/table top as strong as a solid piece of the same width. Expansion/contraction due to changing humidity and/or internal stress causes cracks/checks in solid pieces. Now, that doesn't say anything about what may happen over time to the glue. We've probably all seen some glued joints that didn't hold for a couple of centuries. I suspect that's where the choice between PVA and hide glue gets interesting.

Dowells or loose tendons will add strength, and not just by increasing the glue area. Biscuits not so much according to what I've read, including some test results.

[steven c newman]

This is all I use..
347085
There are all kinds of fancy edge profiles that interlock together......But, the wood may just go ahead and fail just a 1/4" away from the joint. Because? Wood is moving back and forth but that fancy joint will not keep up. A crack will appear beside the glue line,,,,and then finally fail. It is because the joint IS stronger than the wood it joins together.

[Shannon Cuffe]

This applys to joint failure at the glue line, not the timber either side of the glue line.

If good, properly used glue is stronger than wood, then NO you cannot increase the strength of a glue joint. What you can do is double up on the joint by adding glue as being the primary holding mechanism, plus additional mechanical fixings such as a drawbored fox wedged blind floating tenon as insurance :D You haven't actually increased the strength of the joint, because you can take the glue away completely and the drawbored fox wedge tenon will still hold the boards together, or vice versa. You 'may' have increased the lifetime of the joint because if the PVA glue fails due to excessive humidity or UV or heat etc etc, it will be some seasons afterwards before you realise the glue stopped working because the drawbored fox wedged floating tenons were holding the boards together.

[Ron Kellison]

If you look at all the tests that have been published about gluing a well-machined edge joint, the wood will give before the glue joint. I would note that most of these studies have used standard NA woods e.g., pine, maple, ash, oak, etc. I have always had the opinion that such things as biscuits, dowels, lock joints, etc. as mostly useful as alignment aids rather than adding additional strength. Just one man's opinion!

[Patrick Chase]

My remarks pertain solely to edge joints - long grain to long grain. Assertion: the wood of an edge joint will fail before modern glues using properly prepared edges.

Question:
I read a lot posts saying that this or that technique will strengthen the joint. If you do increase strength, the wood will still fail because you can't make the wood stronger than the wood. I also assert that anything you do to the edge joint can only make it weaker or result in no strength gain.

Is my belief wrong? If so, please explain.

Thanks, Curt

The rated strength of the glue for long<->long grain is indeed greater than that of most woods as you say. Your assertion is therefore as (actually somewhat more) true as those rated strengths are accurate.

The question you therefore have to ask when designing is: Are the rated strengths valid to your situation?

Here are some examples where they might *not* be valid:

1. Temperature when tested/stressed. Many wood glues lose strength fairly quickly at greatly elevated temperatures. Some glues embrittle at low temperatures. In either case you'll want to peruse the datasheets carefully.

2. Conditions during gluing. IIRC both high and low humidity and low temperature can degrade the strength of wood glue joints. The ratings are for something like 70F/50RH IIRC.

3. Moisture, and particularly any sort of immersion. Even within waterproof glues there are varying degrees of resistance, for example Titebond III can withstand being boiled for 4 hours and still retain a certain percentage of its strength (can't remember or find the %age offhand) while Titebond II can only withstand room-temperature immersion.

4. Surface prep and clamping. Wood glues work best when the wood surface is porous and the bond is extremely thin. Moving away from the ideal in either respect can cost you strength relative to the specified nominal.

5. Peeling failure due to wood movement. Even with aligned grain the ends of the glued-up piece may absorb or lose moisture faster than the center, just as when drying the wood to begin with. Drying in particular may cause the ends to "pull apart" and check as they shrink faster than the center, and that can "peel" the glue joint (note that strengths are typically rated in tension or shear, not peeling). Springing the joint as Jim described is one common way to avoid this issue in a glue-only joint.

6. Oily woods. The rated strengths are typically for Birch or Maple.

So in other words and as always "it depends".

[Kees Heiden]

If you are referring to outright mechanical strength, a good glue on a fine sawn or coarse sanded edge with no other jointing will be as strong are required. This is open to debate and I await the howls of anguish at the idea of gluing an unplanned edge. I should add that the sanding of an edge is a precision operation using no finer than 80 grit and a sanding technique that does not roll the edges of the work piece.



Not quite the subject of this thread, but this is debatable. The strength of the glue joint comes from two sources. One is where the molecules of the wood are attracted to the mollecules of the glue. The other is the mechanical strength. Wood has a porous surface, so the glue seeps into the wood for some depth, usually about 2-6 woodcells deep. When you roughen up the surface with 80 or coarser grit, then that surface mostly consists of loose fibers with no mechanical strength. The advantage of cutting the surface with a sharp plane blade is that you leave the integrity of the surface intact. We allready discussed this about two weeks ago ( too lazy to look it up).

And about adding extra reinforcement to a glue joint, I think it mostly could be helpfull in the long term, like some other posters allready explained.

[Stewie Simpson]

Kees; as you rightly mention, it been a hotly contested topic recently. Count me out of Round 2.

Stewie;

http://i.stack.imgur.com/C55Tu.jpg

[Stanley Covington]

My remarks pertain solely to edge joints - long grain to long grain. Assertion: the wood of an edge joint will fail before modern glues using properly prepared edges.

Question:
I read a lot posts saying that this or that technique will strengthen the joint. If you do increase strength, the wood will still fail because you can't make the wood stronger than the wood. I also assert that anything you do to the edge joint can only make it weaker or result in no strength gain.

Is my belief wrong? If so, please explain.

Curt:

I think you are mostly correct, within a very narrow range of conditions, with your assertion that "anything you do to the edge joint can only make it weaker or result in no strength gain." What are the conditions in that very narrow range?

1. Acceptable glue joint. This requires: Fresh glue. No contamination. Perfect adhesion. Acceptable curing temperatures. Tight joint full length and full width. Not too much clamping pressure, nor too little. Same moisture content in the boards on both sides of the joint. Are these conditions always achieved? Always in the labs where glues are tested in small lots, only sometimes in the real world. Please visit a glulam factory. They know their glues, and know how to make a long-grain glue joint.

2. Acceptable exposure conditions. This means: No exposure to solvents. Acceptable range of temperatures and humidity (moisture). No exposure to forces, long-term stresses, and loading conditions where creep might occur (few glues sold for general consumption can effectively prevent long-term creep, and PVA is definitely not among them). Please visit a glulam factory.

3. Redundancy. This means that there are other members in the assembly, and multiple glued surfaces, to carry the load without failing even if a single member or single glue-surface is not up to spec. This condition does not exist in glued-up tabletop, or a boat hull. Please visit a glulam factory.

My point is that under ideal conditions, where the glue is performing per spec, in the situation it was intended to handle, and the glue-joint is perfect, the wood will fail first. These ideal conditions are frequently not the case. Where the glue-joint might fail, as they often do under harsh conditions, redundancy is one way of making sure things hold together. This is SOP in structural conditions where failure means people might die. But redundancy takes space, adds weight, adds cost, and often looks ugly. In such conditions, you can add something to the joint to hold the boards together even if the glue joint weakens, creeps, or outright fails. In this case, the "anything you do to the glue joint" will add considerable strength and reliability, since the glue is compromised.

For most woodworking applications, and certainly for hobbyists, a failed glue joint is no big deal. No one takes a fall, or has a roof fall on their head, or drowns. But there are applications where glue alone is too thin a reed to rely on, and a belt and suspenders approach is justified, IMO (sorry to mix metaphors).

Stan

[Pat Barry]

If you look at all the tests that have been published about gluing a well-machined edge joint, the wood will give before the glue joint. I would note that most of these studies have used standard NA woods e.g., pine, maple, ash, oak, etc. I have always had the opinion that such things as biscuits, dowels, lock joints, etc. as mostly useful as alignment aids rather than adding additional strength. Just one man's opinion!
This is pretty much my experience as well. Biscuits were something Norm used quite a lot for his projects and I followed suit. I had a result though, wherein the biscuit telegraphed thru to the show surface of a table top I made from red oak. That experience turned me off biscuits. I see little strength in dowels (for edge glue applications). I have had good results with both Elmers and Titebond 1 and 2 wood glues for edge joining. I don't work with unfriendly woods however, ie teak and other suchh 'oily' woods. There the results will be different.

[Prashun Patel]

" I also assert that anything you do to the edge joint can only make it weaker or result in no strength gain."

Curt, I don't understand this statement. Can you explain this assertion?

In my projects, edge joints tend to be long with a good deal of surface area. Also, the joints tend not to be in situations where they wouldn't get much stress from a user. The biggest practical risk is wood movement that causes the seam to appear or parts of the joint to perhaps spring apart (although that's never happened to me, even on my earliest, poorly jointed projects). It's not like cross grain joints where there's a lot of leverage exerted on the joint. I'm not making a lot of cantilevered shelves for encyclopedias or 'Conoid' style chairs with the seat grain running sideways.

It just doesn't seem like a practical consideration whether the glue or wood would fail.

For kicks, when I trim the waste off panel glue ups, I often try to break the cutoff piece, which will have several edge-grain joints. Sometimes the glue fails (usually if it's not dry enough), but the wood does fail often. But I chalk that up to having created a 'short grain' situation, where there's a lot of torque you can exert if the piece is wide.

[Robert Engel]

You are basically correct in there is usually nothing practically gained by anything in addition to glue but I wouldn't say its weaker.

Most of the techniques you are probably talking about are more for alignment than strength.

[Mike Brady]

I can only relay what I have read or heard from woodworking professionals, but the statement by the OP does seem to be true. Anything beyond glueing does nothing to strengthen the bond between boards that are joined at the edges. Other ad-ons such as biscuits serve the purpose of (maybe) helping to align the boards. There are a couple of caveats, though. The boards need to be thick enough to provide a bonding surface (1/2" min.?), and the edges need to be in full contact with each other when clamped together. I have found that book-folding the boards in a vise and then hand planing a very slight hollow towards the midpoint of the joint results in a perfect joint from end-to-end. The only problem I sometimes encounter is when mating boards are not perfectly flat and some face-jointing may be required on the show side after the claps come off.

[Brian Holcombe]

I've joined many boards thinner than 1/2. I also remain unconvinced with respect to jointing an edge hollow, I don't consider it appropriate in every situation. Large panels seem to glue better with flat joints that are not hollowed, so long as you ensure that they're properly mated to one another.

For small and thin work the 'slightly' hollowed edge seems to come in handy.

[Megan Fitzpatrick]

Curt, you might find this of interest: http://www.popularwoodworking.com/techniques/the_anvil_test

[Mike Henderson]

I've often broken pieces of long-grain-to-long-grain glued wood just to see if the glue was stronger than the wood (offcuts). Always breaks in the wood and not the joint.

Mike

[Stewie Simpson]

http://www.franklinadhesivesandpolymers.com/docs/default-source/default-document-library/7-13-15sticky-biz.pdf?sfvrsn=0

[Curt Putnam]

" I also assert that anything you do to the edge joint can only make it weaker or result in no strength gain."

Curt, I don't understand this statement. Can you explain this assertion?

In my projects, edge joints tend to be long with a good deal of surface area. Also, the joints tend not to be in situations where they wouldn't get much stress from a user. The biggest practical risk is wood movement that causes the seam to appear or parts of the joint to perhaps spring apart (although that's never happened to me, even on my earliest, poorly jointed projects). It's not like cross grain joints where there's a lot of leverage exerted on the joint. I'm not making a lot of cantilevered shelves for encyclopedias or 'Conoid' style chairs with the seat grain running sideways.

It just doesn't seem like a practical consideration whether the glue or wood would fail.

For kicks, when I trim the waste off panel glue ups, I often try to break the cutoff piece, which will have several edge-grain joints. Sometimes the glue fails (usually if it's not dry enough), but the wood does fail often. But I chalk that up to having created a 'short grain' situation, where there's a lot of torque you can exert if the piece is wide.



Operating on the assumption that you have two edges, well planed, then cutting holes in them (with woodworker's precision) is not going to help. At least I do not see how. Even with dominos, you have still cut holes in good wood. I can understand wanting mechanical strength in case of glue failure, but we are not talking glue failure - that's a separate discussiion, IMO. As sloppy as most t&G joints are, I believe that they weaken the edge when glued. I've seen quite a number of boards with a broken tongue. If a simple square edge is as strong as you can get it seems reasonable that fussing with it is going worsen things. Fix it until it breaks.

[Patrick Chase]

Operating on the assumption that you have two edges, well planed, then cutting holes in them (with woodworker's precision) is not going to help. At least I do not see how. Even with dominos, you have still cut holes in good wood. I can understand wanting mechanical strength in case of glue failure, but we are not talking glue failure - that's a separate discussiion, IMO. As sloppy as most t&G joints are, I believe that they weaken the edge when glued. I've seen quite a number of boards with a broken tongue. If a simple square edge is as strong as you can get it seems reasonable that fussing with it is going worsen things. Fix it until it breaks.

A loose T&G will indeed degrade the joint because the horizontal bonds will be weak, but I doubt many people in this discussion cut them that way.

A tight and properly glued T&G might not add anything to the strength, but it won't subtract. After all, if the glue is truly as strong as the wood then it doesn't really matter what path the glue joint follows so long as it's continuous. If the glue isn't as strong as the wood then the extra gluing area can only help. Either way you won't be behind in the deal except inasmuch as you've spent time doing stuff that wasn't needed.

The loss of cross-sectional area along the glue line due to biscuits/dominos/etc is negligible BTW. IMO they're a great productivity aid when gluing up, and they don't hurt the joint in any noteworthy way.

[Jim Koepke]

I like T&G or dowels because they help align the joint.

It isn't terribly hard to align a joint without them, but there always seems to be a touch of slippage.

jtk

[Kees Heiden]

The loss of cross-sectional area along the glue line due to biscuits/dominos/etc is negligible BTW. IMO they're a great productivity aid when gluing up, and they don't hurt the joint in any noteworthy way.

Unless the biscuits or the domino's start to telegraph through to the surface.

[Pat Barry]

I like T&G or dowels because they help align the joint.

It isn't terribly hard to align a joint without them, but there always seems to be a touch of slippage.

jtk
You need to make some cauls and use those for panel glue-ups. They really take the fussiness out of the process and you can eliminate those nasty dowels.

T&G is huge overkill for a glued edge joint. In my mind they are only for non-glued edge to edge assembly so that the individual boards can float with seasonal changes.

[Prashun Patel]

Using cauls is great. But to align panels flat, it they can be a little tricky. Getting the clamps on the opposing sides can be tricky. The cauls need to be sized for the width of the panel. The glue up needs to be elevated so the clamps and cauls can engage. And, you need a set of clamps for each vertical set of cauls you use.

Dowels and biscuits and dominos take that pain out - especially on the widest and longest of glue ups like a dining table.

It is puzzling to me why anyone would have a strict religion about this. I use cauls sometimes, and dominos sometimes, and nothing sometimes. It's all dependent on convenience of getting a flat, flush joint. It appears from every single panel I've made that holes along the edge do not make any practical difference on the quality of the joint. The only thing that matters is the quality of the jointing.

[Mike Henderson]

The only issue with biscuits, dowels or Dominos is if you have to trim the panel and wind up cutting through the item. I have seen woodworkers in school do that. Maybe it's part of the learning process.

The problem with cauls is setting up to use them. As Prashun said, you need to elevate your glue up to be able to get the cauls and clamps under the work. Once you get your main clamps on, you can remove the cauls. You don't have to leave them until the glue fully sets - they're just needed to hold everything in place while you get the panel in clamps.

Mike

[Patrick Chase]

The only issue with biscuits, dowels or Dominos is if you have to trim the panel and wind up cutting through the item. I have seen woodworkers in school do that. Maybe it's part of the learning process.

Wow, you'd have to commit an epic measurement/math blunder to get into that sort of trouble. I think that the appropriate corrective action would be to learn elementary-school-level math (addition, subtraction, that sort of thing) rather than avoid biscuits.

[Prashun Patel]

I have done it too. Not proud of it, but I sympathize with it.

[Patrick Chase]

You need to make some cauls and use those for panel glue-ups. They really take the fussiness out of the process and you can eliminate those nasty dowels.

This seems rather subjective to me. What objectively makes floating tenons (dowels, biscuits, dominos, etc) "nasty"?

The objections I've seen so far are either flat wrong ("they weaken the joint") or assume utter incompetence on the part of the woodworker (surfacing during trimming). When I see those sorts of arguments I tend to assume that the speaker is a religious zealot of some sort bent on enforcing their "One True Way" on everybody else.

The telegraphing issue is real in the sense that there is a thickness limit below which you can't use tenons. That isn't a reason to not use tenons, though - just don't use them where they don't make sense.

[Patrick Chase]

I have done it too. Not proud of it, but I sympathize with it.

I don't think I've done that, but I've made some ghastly blunders. I don't use them as justification to bad-mouth whatever technique I was attempting at the time, though. Screwups of that magnitude will cause problems with *any* approach, so the correct fix is to try to not screw up.

[Pat Barry]

This seems rather subjective to me. What objectively makes floating tenons (dowels, biscuits, dominos, etc) "nasty"?

The objections I've seen so far are either flat wrong ("they weaken the joint") or assume utter incompetence on the part of the woodworker (surfacing during trimming). When I see those sorts of arguments I tend to assume that the speaker is a religious zealot of some sort bent on enforcing their "One True Way" on everybody else.

The telegraphing issue is real in the sense that there is a thickness limit below which you can't use tenons. That isn't a reason to not use tenons, though - just don't use them where they don't make sense.
By nasty dowels I am referring to the time and fussiness involved with getting them positioned and drilled squarely and perfectly aligned to each other. Biscuits on the other hand are not neanderthal but do give a degree of freedom. This isn't subjective

[Patrick Chase]

By nasty dowels I am referring to the time and fussiness involved with getting them positioned and drilled squarely and perfectly aligned to each other. Biscuits on the other hand are not neanderthal but do give a degree of freedom. This isn't subjective

Sure, but IMO cauls are also nasty by a similar time/fussiness-based argument. As usual people are best at what they practice the most...

[Brian Holcombe]

I've seen that it is fairly common to use two rows of biscuits in 8/4 material, likely due to the machines and how they're setup (for 4/4) so, in that instance I would not be entirely surprised to hear that one has cut into the biscuit mortise.

I don't use biscuits or dowels or any other method of alignment, generally I correct the panel while glueing but leave it rough on its faces so that I can work the panel from a rough state to avoid regretting having face jointed one side.

However, I understand why people do use a method of alignment, and for those partially machining stock prior to glue up it makes a great deal of sense.

[Stanley Covington]

I've seen that it is fairly common to use two rows of biscuits in 8/4 material, likely due to the machines and how they're setup (for 4/4) so, in that instance I would not be entirely surprised to hear that one has cut into the biscuit mortise.

I don't use biscuits or dowels or any other method of alignment, generally I correct the panel while glueing but leave it rough on its faces so that I can work the panel from a rough state to avoid regretting having face jointed one side.

However, I understand why people do use a method of alignment, and for those partially machining stock prior to glue up it makes a great deal of sense.

Using some means of alignment, be it biscuits, dowels, or pins is very useful, maybe even essential in a few cases, IMO.

The first is when edge gluing long boards, especially if they are thin. They tend to warp and displace and slip under clamp pressure. It can require a lot of cauls to keep edges aligned, and a lot of clamps, and a lot of cushioning material for the clamps to prevent them from damaging the boards being glued. All this is aggravated when gluing up several sets of boards in sequence. If you are doing it by yourself and without a couple of helpers, things can go very wrong unless you are a built like a Hindu god.

But with the addition of alignment measures, such as biscuits, things go together very smoothly.

Also, when gluing up a complicated cabinet assembly, especially with angles other than 90 degrees, pins or biscuits help a lot. Especially when you are working alone. If you are willing to use nails or a brad gun during assembly, things become easier too. Aesthetics can become a problem with nails and brads .

Stan

[Brian Holcombe]

Good point Stan, long, wide and thin panels do present an issue at times. I tend to glue them up one pair of boards at a time, but it does increase the length of time required for glue ups.

[Stewie Simpson]

This is discussion is turning into some sort of mothers day meeting. Woodworking is not that complicated. What were woodworkers doing before the advent of online forums. You guessed it. They were using that grey matter between the ears, and a bit of self confidence to get the job done. And no, you don't need a science or engineering degree to be a competent woodworker.

[Patrick Chase]

If you are willing to use nails or a brad gun during assembly, things become easier too. Aesthetics can become a problem with nails and brads .

That's where I draw the line - I use nails/brads (and screws for that matter) when gluing up quickie shop furniture and jigs/fixtures, but avoid them for anything that will leave my shop. I cheated and used my 23 ga pin nailer for one difficult piece a while back, but that's about it.

[Patrick Chase]

And no, you don't need a science or engineering degree to be a competent woodworker.

Heavens, no. IMO once you move beyond the basics aesthetics become the biggest challenge (it's certainly mine), and an overly analytical approach can be a liability.

[Stewie Simpson]

For fixing skirts, architraves, mouldings, and other odd jobs, the T Nails leave a superior finish compared to the traditional bullet head. I have a Paslode (gas) 2nd fixing, and brad (air), nail gun in my workshop and wouldn't part with them. The Paslode (gas) framing gun is always handy for those bigger jobs. The T Nails are also less prone to splitting the wood when used closer to the edge of the work. In days gone by, it was practice by some when attaching fine wood mouldings to tap the head of brad into the wood 1st, before driving the pointy end home, to minimise the risk of splitting.

[Derek Cohen]

Using some means of alignment, be it biscuits, dowels, or pins is very useful, maybe even essential in a few cases, IMO.

The first is when edge gluing long boards, especially if they are thin. They tend to warp and displace and slip under clamp pressure. It can require a lot of cauls to keep edges aligned, and a lot of clamps, and a lot of cushioning material for the clamps to prevent them from damaging the boards being glued. All this is aggravated when gluing up several sets of boards in sequence. If you are doing it by yourself and without a couple of helpers, things can go very wrong unless you are a built like a Hindu god.

But with the addition of alignment measures, such as biscuits, things go together very smoothly.

Also, when gluing up a complicated cabinet assembly, especially with angles other than 90 degrees, pins or biscuits help a lot. Especially when you are working alone. If you are willing to use nails or a brad gun during assembly, things become easier too. Aesthetics can become a problem with nails and brads .

Stan

Here is the method I used to glue up the 1/4" thick panels in my recent chest build. The panels needed to be 1/4" thick so as to bend them within the curved frames.

Note that the two panel sections were book matched and received a spring joint.

To glue up, the panel pieces were first worked from the back side. Tape was stretched across and used to pull the sections together ..


http://www.inthewoodshop.com/Furniture/OneStepBack_html_m34b74f22.jpg


The full side was done, with the joint line reinforced to minimise glue running out ...


http://www.inthewoodshop.com/Furniture/OneStepBack_html_74ff4a1.jpg


Reversing the panel, glue was spread down the join ..


http://www.inthewoodshop.com/Furniture/OneStepBack_html_m379f6f8d.jpg


This could then be opened out, taped together (again with stretched tape), joins levelled with a plastic mallet, and lightly clamped together. Bricks on "loose cauls" were added to hold everything flat while the glue dries ...


http://www.inthewoodshop.com/Furniture/OneStepBack_html_m4ef94881.jpg

Completed panels ...


http://www.inthewoodshop.com/Furniture/BackonTrack_html_d627785.jpg



Regards from Perth

Derek

[Pat Barry]

Very resourceful Derek!

[glenn bradley]

Wow, what a great series of conversation. The OP obviously hit on something a lot of folks feel strongly about and that's great. I'm in the "mostly PVA" camp and use other glues if the situation will benefit from it. Long edge glue-ups for me focus on smooth well mating edges. For longer runs i will sometimes use splines to ease assembly but, this has nothing to do with me seeking additional strength. I read something the other day about a guy who uses draw-bore floating tenons in his larger, thicker panel glue-ups; whatever makes you happy. i have never had a failure of an edge glue-up reported back to me so I will just keep on trukin' ;-)

[Patrick Chase]

For fixing skirts, architraves, mouldings, and other odd jobs, the T Nails leave a superior finish compared to the traditional bullet head. I have a Paslode (gas) 2nd fixing, and brad (air), nail gun in my workshop and wouldn't part with them. The Paslode (gas) framing gun is always handy for those bigger jobs. The T Nails are also less prone to splitting the wood when used closer to the edge of the work. In days gone by, it was practice by some when attaching fine wood mouldings to tap the head of brad into the wood 1st, before driving the pointy end home, to minimise the risk of splitting.

Headless pins are also quite useful for the same reason. Of course the issue there is retention, though that can sometimes (depending on geometry) be dealt with by driving them at varying angles such that they "interlock".

I should have been more clear that I have and use a full complement of pneumatic nailers and staplers. I just don't use them for fine work for subjective/preference reasons.

[Brian Holcombe]

When you say, pneumatic nailer....do you mean the object on the right hand side of this photo?

https://brianholcombewoodworkerblog.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/img_4769.jpg

[steven c newman]

Looks like some I've used.

Getting the feeling the "horse" has done died?

[Patrick Chase]

When you say, pneumatic nailer....do you mean the object on the right hand side of this photo?

No, we mean the kind that was very likely used to install the carpet on the top of that photo (pneumatic stapler, basically the same thing). Or did you install your Traditional Neander Carpet using only hand methods? :-)

[Brian Holcombe]

:D It was already installed when we bought place. :D