I will be making a kitchen table approximately 32 x 48 using white ash. What are the pros and cons of Breadboard Ends?
Discussion Forum
Get It All!
UNLIMITED Membership is like taking a master class in woodworking for less than $10 a month.
Start Your Free TrialCategories
Discussion Forum
Digital Plans Library
Member exclusive! – Plans for everyone – from beginners to experts – right at your fingertips.
Highlights
-
Shape Your Skills
when you sign up for our emails
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. -
Shop Talk Live Podcast -
Our favorite articles and videos -
E-Learning Courses from Fine Woodworking
-
-
Replies
Willy:
Breadboard ends help keep the top flat and add a nice look to the table. They are seen more often on more casual furniture than on formal pieces. There are a number of ways to make them, but be sure to allow for wood movement because you are attaching them across the grain of the tabletop.
I understand the issue about wood movement very well, but you know, about 20 years ago I made a blanket chest whose top was made with those breadboard ends and in all that time it has not cracked or split. I suppose it's because it is sealed well?
No finish is really effective in preventing moisture gain and loss, it just slows the process down. No matter the finish, if you live in a climate with large seasonal swings in relative humidity the wood will be expanding and contracting.
As for why your piece hasn't cracked there are a few possible explanations:
1. The piece isn't exposed to large swings in humidity, hence no wood movement.
2. The wood in the piece is an especially stable species and/or it is quartersawn reducing the amount the wood moves when it gains and loses moisture.
3. The bread board ends are properly attached to allow the top to expand and contract freely so no stress is created.
John White, Shop Manager, Fine Woodworking Magazine
The only good explanation would be your number one point. The house is almost always air conditioned 24/7 in the summer. At the time I made it I didn't even know about that technique for allowing wood movement in breadboard ends. The wood is all poplar and mostly flatsawn. Hey, thanks for the info!
Pretty, but more trouble than they are worth. A properly made table top doesn't need breadboard ends to stay flat.
John W.
personally, i don't like them. i don't think they look good and most of the year the table and the breadboard ends are of different lenghs due to the field of the table expanding and contracting with changes in humidity. i've seen breadboard ends made extra long in a greene and greene style table, that looked ok because you really didn't notice the changes in the size of the field with the ends sticking out on both sides.
greg
I think breadboard ends are elegant and the sign of a craftsman when made properly. They are an honest and useful construction and it takes thought and attention to detail to do them well. They are a time-honored technique.
The change in dimension between the width of the top and the length of the end caps due to seasonal moisture and temperature changes is not objectionable and is a reminder of the nature of the materials.
Rich
If your table has legs at the corners, there will be aprons crossing the top only a few inches from the ends. They're taller than the breadboards, and therefore will do a much better job of keeping the top flat. Furthermore, they're hidden so that changes in width of the top are not as obvious as with the breadboard ends.
If the table had excessive over-hang (trestle, etc.) I would consider it. Otherwise I would pass period. But.. that's just what I would do. :>)
Good luck...
SARGE.. g-47
I don't think breadboard ends were ever intended to prevent the cupping of the top. Their purpose is to cover up end grain. Exposed end grain can lead to excessive shrinkage at the ends and thus cracks. Springing the joints between the top boards helps reduce or prevent this. Breadboards are found on many high style pieces in different forms. Some have mitered edges.
Adam
Adam,
I've been turning your reply over in my mind, and I can't think of too many instances I've seen where high-style tables have had bread board ends; only ones I recall seeing are tavern and kitchen trestle and work tables, utilitarian more than stylish, all of which had large overhangs (which might mean they were for warpage control, not just "for pretty"). You would expect tables in kitchen or tavern environs to be getting wet, with spills and cleanup, inducing warpage tendencies (unequal moisture on top vs. underside) as well as shrinkage cracks. Of the dozens of large drop-leaf tables I've had in the shop, I recall only one having "breadboards", only on the leaves, not the top proper,(which would seem to indicate they were not to cover end grain, but to prevent warp on the unsupported leaves). Don't remember ever seeing a banquet table with breadboards to hide endgrain. Tops of lowboys (dressing tables) typically aren't breadboarded, certainly thay are stylish, and have plenty of endgrain showing. Ditto for rectangular teatables, although they frequently have their endgrain covered-with a molding, (as do many chests of drawers). I do remember seeing a picture of a Conn. lowboy with a dished, breadboard ended, top, and candleslides on its ends. Can we agree that such a piece is out of the ordinary (as is much Connecticut furniture design!)
Of course slant front desk lids are nearly all finished on their ends with breadboards, I believe for flatness as much as for appearances, or preventing cracking (they are mostly one board, not glued up, on the best old work). And blanket chests are often breadboarded. The reason for these instances , and not drop leaf table leaves, being supported could, I believe, be due to the fact that they both typically have locks in place, requiring that they be kept in alignment with their strikeplates or keepers.
Other breadboarded ends on furniture components that come to mind are dressing slides and candle slides, and desk pullouts (or "lopers") having caps. The slides could be argued that they are covered for appearance sake (again, not being wide enough for gluelines opening up to be a concern), but really, need to be kept flat for ease of operation. The desk lid supports are too narrow for their ends to be covered for anything but appearance's sake, but of course, many are not capped, but molded on their end grain.
As far as cracking goes, I've had to repair many breadboarded panels because their cross grain construction did not allow for seasonal movement, inducing shrinkage cracks rather than preventing them. Granted that does not go to the maker's intent (I hope no one ever made a piece intending it self destruct), but period furniture makers did not have to worry so much about seasonal movement before the advent of central heating, as we do nowadays. That's why we see more cross grain construction on old work. They weren't ignorant of its effects, just could get away with more owing to lesser variations in relative humidity than we have now. That raises the question, though, of why they would use breadboard ends to prevent a cracking problem that they didn't particularly worry about in other areas?
Covering end grain, when it was a cosmetic issue, was most often done by gluing and or nailing on a molding or strip of some kind, or applying a veneer crossband. Tops of chests of drawers, sideboards, etc come to mind.
Regards,
Ray
Yeah I agree. I was thinking primarily of secretaries/escritoires I've been looking at recently. Have it on my to do list to make an Edward Evans "scrutore". Pretty sure I've seen early dressing tables with bread board ends. They were mitered as i recall.The long banquet tables were are pretty anachronistic as far as I can tell. The more formal tables don't lend themselves to breadboard ends.You're right tho, and I appreciate your remarks. Its hard to make any generalizations about these sorts of things. There really is a lot of variation. I'm quick to make generalizations primarily because the alternative, saying "its varies" doesn't help someone with a question. (I call that the museum answer. some places its the only answer you hear.)That said, I see many deliberate efforts to cover end grain. I mean, that's what facias are, right? Not everybody has facias. I think that's what a London DT is all about as well.As far as cupping goes, I have this theory I would love to back up someday. When I see really well built 18th c stuff, I very often see table tops or the like made from very wide stock. My theory is that they preferred to use something close to quatersawn for stuff they couldn't restrain. In that case the breadboard end:
a) wouldnt' do much for structural support
b) would cover the end grain nicely
c) wouldn't be as risky in terms of the cross grain issueWide stock usually comes from the center of the tree, so quite a bit of it has the rings perpendicular to the face)I agree with everything you wrote about their radiant heated homes. The only thing I'd like to add is that they may not have cared whether stuff cracked or not. The flip side is that their stuff probably will outlast our plywood and PVA stuff, so when we talk about pieces "failing" as our community sometimes does, we should narrowly define "failures".Adam
Edited 7/10/2006 9:26 pm ET by AdamCherubini
My guess is the the largest wood movement problems have come in the period following the advent of central heating, but before the spread of air conditioning, especially central air. Today we have only a few weeks in spring and fall where we open homes to high moisture levels. In winter heating dehumidifies, and in summer AC does the same. I suspect we could get away with the old construction--at least if we start with 8% MC wood rather than 12% air dried.
I wouldn't characterize seeking reproductions as "fakes". To me, fake implies the intent to deceive financially. But if there are any genuine period pieces in a home, modern factory furniture stands out from across the largest room. Its different style and finish is glaringly wrong. And, since the finest American furniture from the 18th and early 19th century represents one of the very highest points in furniture design in history, it is not unreasonable to want to live with it in one's home.
Willy has gotten much good feedback concerning the possible use of clamps (to use the standard trade terminology) on his table, so it is not my purpose to rehash the various considerations. But, I do wonder about the basis for Adam's assertion:"I don't think breadboard ends were ever intended to prevent the cupping of the top. ..."While other factors played a role in how/when clamps have been used in furniture-making, a couple of quotes make it clear that there was, early on at least, a perception that the use of clamps/clamping had something to do with the issue of cupping. From 1688 (R. Holme, _Armoury_): "The ends of Tables are commonly clampt to preserve them from warping." From 1823 (P. Nicholson, _Practical Builder_): "Clamp, a piece of wood fixed to the end of a thin board to prevent it from casting. "While these perceptions don't prove intent on the part of furniture makers, I believe they are suggestive. The relative merits of using clamps to prevent/minimize cupping/casting in various situations can (and have been) discussed, but I'm unaware of any evidence to establish that such considerations were never part of the equation.A quick perusal of _The [1828] Philadelphia Cabinet and Chair Makers' Union Book of Prices for Manufacturing Cabinet Ware_ makes it clear that the use of clamps was not a casual consideration. This "price" book was actually one of piece-rate wages to be paid the journeymen for their work, and it contains a number of tables/charts for work beyond the base construction features of any given piece.One of these charts was "Table No. 10. Of Clamping." - which indicates the extra amount the journeyman was to be paid for adding clamping to any piece of furniture. The amount depended on a number of factors. While the primary factory was the length of the clamping ("9 inches long or under, Above 9 inches to 1 ft. 4, ..." etc.), other factors included thickness and type of material, as well as "sweep" (curved) work and mortice clamping rather than the base tongue-and-groove clamping. Among the material/thickness listings is ... "Inch cherry, or other hard wood, to be veneered on." Unless I'm misreading this listing, it appears that some panels were to be provided with clamps as part of preparation for veneering the entire panel. While it is generally believed to be a bad practice to veneer over such cross-grain joints, this possibility reminded me of a discussion about clamping which took place on oldtools a few years back. That discussion had to do with an eighteenth century fall-front desk with a (presumably) glued clamped lid which appeared to have remained sound despite the cross-grain construction. This led to some speculation as to why the early furniture maker would have chosen to "break the rules" in this situation, and what factors might be involved in his doing so successfully. Regarding the purpose, one explanation was that the use of the clamping may have had to do with minimizing wood movement (expansion/contraction). This would have provided dimensional stability between the hinge edge and the lock edge, so that the lock could be used at any time of the year. (And, maybe, this helps explain why this was called clamping?)In any event, this possibility prompted me to see if I could use any of the wood technology information in Bruce Hoadley's _Understanding Wood_ to begin to explain the successful use of this cross-grain construction. This resulted in a lengthy post to oldtools, which might be of some interesthttp://nika.frontier.iarc.uaf.edu/~cswingle/archive/get.phtml?message_id=105237#message:Mind you, this was a thought exercise and I'm not necessarily recommending any specific cross-grain construction techniques which might be suggested by it. But, I found it pretty thought provoking to undertake and wonder if further discussion might be fruitful?Don McConnell
Eureka Springs, AR
Don,What's "casting"? Is casting the same as cupping? I don't think its the same now, but was it then? And is winding the same as warping? Is warping a general term? Then? Now?I've been thinking about these things. I know you are the right guy to answer such questions.Adam
Casting = bowed (in the length.)
In winding = twisted (like a propellor.)
Warped, to me, is a none specific term indicating out of flatness, but that's all it means. Warped wood can be cupped, bowed, in winding, bent, kinked, etc., or possibly, all those faults might show in a piece of warped wood.
Warp or warped are words that I think of as falling into the same category as humid, as used to describe the humidity in the air. Humid is a non-specific term, whereas Absolute Humidity (AH) and Relative Humidity (RH) are measurable and precise terms that describe the amount of gaseous water (water vapour) air carries given certain parameters, e.g., temperature and barometric pressure. Slainte.Richard Jones Furniture
If a board's edge needs straightening because it has a long curve in it, but its face is flat, what's that called? Is that a cast? Or is cast the other way?Thanks for the reply Richard,Adam
Adam, you said, "If a board's edge needs straightening because it has a long curve in it, but its face is flat, what's that called?" = bent.
Cast is bowed in the length with the wide faces perpendicular to the direction of the casting (bow.)
A board, of course, could be both bowed (cast) and bent: many are, with the wrinkle that a goodly selection are also cupped and in winding, ha, ha. Slainte.Richard Jones Furniture
Incidentally, there are ocassions where clamped ends can offer real abilities to help hold a planked up solid wood top flat. For instance, if the main top finishes at about 20 mm (3/4") thick the clamps might be 40- 60 mm (1-1/2" to 2- 3/8") thick (or more.)
The profile treatment of the clamp doesn't have to be simply square. It can be profiled in some way to offer an interesting termination of such things as table and cabinet tops. If the table is a hall table the front visible edge of the top and the front end of the clamp can remain in line by rigidly fixing the clamp atthe front edge. All movement occurs backwards from the front edge meaning all misalignment occurs towards the back edge (which is up against the wall and therefore much less visible.) Slainte.
Richard Jones Furniture
Edited 7/14/2006 11:22 am by SgianDubh
While I'm not prepared to generalize about the historic use of terms for wood deformation, we do have some idea as to how Peter Nicholson used the term "casting" in his mention of clamps. In the same source, his _Practical Builder_, Nicholson explains: "Casting or Warping, the bending of the surfaces of a piece of wood from their original position." Pretty clearly a generalized usage of the term, which would, quite naturally, include cupping. Especially in this context.As to current terminology, I like to try to follow that laid out in the USDA Forest Service's publication _Drying Hardwood Lumber_. That is available, online, as a pdf document, but for convenience, I thought I'd include a few of the terms, here.First, the general term:"WARP. The distortion in lumber and other wood products that causes the material to depart from its original plane, which usually develops during drying. Warp includes cup, bow, crook, twist, ... and diamonding, or any combination thereof."Now to some of the specifics:"BOW. A form of warp in which lumber deviates from flatness lengthwise but not across the faces."CROOK. A form of warp in which lumber deviates edgewise from a straight line from end to end."CUP. A form of warp in which lumber deviates from a straight line across the width of the wood."DIAMONDING. A form of warp: the change of a cross section of a square-sawn wood item to diamond-shaped during drying. Diamonding occur where the growth rings pass through diagonal corners and is caused by the difference between tangential and radial shrinkage." [I've also thought of this as "casting" - perhaps mistakenly?]Twist, or wind, is not defined in the handbook, but is generally understood I believe.Hope this is of some interest.Don McConnell
Eureka Springs, AR
While I'm not prepared to generalize about the historic use of terms for wood deformation,
Let me get this straight. You're willing to assume "casting" and "warping" are cupping when it refutes my theory (most of which I learned from you) but you're not prepared to generalize when asked for definitions! That's funny Don!
So couldn't it just as easily be the case that Nicholson was talking about winding/twisting? In that case, the bb end couldn't possibly provide any structural reaction for that movement. In that case the bb end would do exactly as I said- help prevent movement by protecting the end grain. Of course you know all this.
Being an italian american, I don't mind this sort of piss and vinegar. But it belongs in my inbox where it won't mislead the nice woodworkers here (including me) who look up to you, trust, and respect you.
Love,
Adam
Adam,I find myself quite puzzled by your response. As you acknowledge, it is difficult to see how a clamp (or, vernacularly, breadboard end) would help deal with wood distortions such as wind/twist and/or bowing. Obviously, a (mortise-and-tenon) frame and panel configuration would seem to have a better chance of addressing those issues.So, when Nicholson indicates that clamping was done to "prevent casting," and he uses the terms warping and casting interchangeably to generally denote wood distortion (he clearly doesn't limit the definition to twisting and/or bowing, e.g.), it seems quite reasonable that his understanding of the word casting would include cupping - especially in the context of clamps/clamping.I don't know. This seems quite reasonable to me. Guess I'm not explaing myself clearly enough?I chose not to generalize about the historic use of such terms as warping, casting, etc., for a couple of different reasons. First, there seemed no need to in order to address the specific question. Second, I really haven't done the research to make such a generalization without it being, pretty much, a simple guess. Which brings me back to my original question concerning the basis of your assertion: "I don't think breadboard ends were ever intended to prevent the cupping of the top. ..." What is your evidence/reasoning for that? Seems to me that the burden of proof is on you.Don McConnell
Eureka Springs, AR
I think they used quarter sawn stock or wide boards that were effectively QS for the sorts of applications in which bread board ends are found. So fundamentally I think that means the bread board end was there for a reason other than cupping (because qs stock doesn't really cup). You're right if your point is that I shouldn't have assumed that they knew what they were doing. They drained your blood when you were sick. Perhaps they thought the bb ends warded away evil spirits. (I'm only half kidding. Feng Shui isn't different, right?)The other thing is that they didn't seem to spline these things on. If you were trying to stop a board from cupping, wouldn't you make the tenons really long and effect some sort of spline? But the faces in those joints are often flat and the tenons are short. So again, it looks like they weren't thinking about cupping. (the tenons would be in torsion- short tenons are terrible in torsion.)From the sources you offer, it may well be that they wanted to stop other forms of warps, thinking the bb end would slow moisture loss (which it would do). As I wrote, covering end grain is a repeated theme in early construction and in my opinion, only abandoned in ignorance.AdamP.S. A couple more things:1) We generally don't see narrow flat sawn boards glued up into wide panels in period furniture- or at least in the pieces that have survived (hint hint). Choosing narrow stock (which usually comes from the outside of the tree) because it fits thru your planer or over your jointer has got to be the biggest detriment of using power tools. So if you are using non-traditional materials and want to use traditional joinery, you may be asking for trouble.2) We could easily expand this discussion to a myriad of other joints, many of which ameliorate the risk of cross grain joinery with wide or qs stock. Most similar is probably the popular Queen Anne lowbody carcass sides, which tenon into the vertical cabriole leg. Cross grain joinery is a part of period work that has been a controversial or contentious subject for woodworkers. (see FWW on making period furniture). In my opinion, the key to the subject is understanding the stock that was traditionally used.
Edited 7/16/2006 7:40 am ET by AdamCherubini
Adam,
I don't understand your position rejecting the most likely reason for using a breadboard- as a means of preventing cup. My experience is in complete disagreement with your contention that breadboard ends are held in place with short tenons. The typical breadboard end I've had apart for repair, looks like a tongue and groove joint from the end. The "tongue", however is what is left of usually a series of quite long (often through) tenons, left with a tongue of 1/4-3/8" length in between, instead of being haunched all the way back to the shoulder.
If you will go back and read my earlier post, you'll see that I was (maybe too?) politely refuting your claims. You agreed with my arguments! There are virtually no examples of breadboard ends where prevention of/controlling warp could not be an issue. There are plenty of examples of exposed end grain to show that covering it up wasn't an issue, and lots of easier ways to cover it (nailed on strips, molding, veneer) when it was. You dismiss banquet tables as an anomaly, but wouldn't you think that with all the end grain exposed on a banquet table top, that is just where the maker would want to cover it to control moisture loss?
As for your argument about old makers using only quarter-sawn stock or wood from the center of the tree, you are seeing different wide boards in your table tops and desk lids than I am.
Ray
Man I wrote a long response and I hit some button accidentally and it disappeared. My hands are sore and I don't have time now to retype it. Here are the highlights:I'm glad you're adding your observations. You are adding value to KNOTS discussions.Its not my job to sort all this out, to be right, or decide what is right. That's the readers' job.The stuff I look at is early 18th c, mostly delaware valley. And I see what I said I saw. Quicky about the tables:
When you said long banquet tables, I was thinking of my refectory table which I know is not typical. More formal tables without bb ends, usually have curved ends which would preclude bb. Tables like my refectory table with bb ends often have very little overhang. If cupping was a concern, the apron would handle it better than a bb could anyway.Sorry I blew that post away.Adam
???
Its not my job to sort all this out, to be right, or decide what is right. That's the readers' job.
Adam,
Sorry about your sore fingers. Sanding out those plane tearouts can be rough. Heh, heh, just kidding.
Of course, demilune or D shaped console ends would be hard to breadboard. There is a picture of one in the Wmsburg book on Southern furniture, on p252. It is a cardtable ,and the breadboards are on the leaf only, not the top. How about those tables with wide drop- leaf center sections, and the wide leaves supported between them? Lots of end grain there, oughta be covered up wouldn't you think? Do you see many drop leaf tables up there in Del Val? Loads of 'em here in Shen Val, I've only seen one with breadboarded ends, and it had them on the leaves only not the top too. Rectangular card tables? Most I've seen have tops chosen for grain and figure, (not qtrsawn,) lotsa endgrain, no breadboards.
Where does one typically find breadboard ends? I repeat: Kitchen/tavern tables, with tops having large overhangs that get wet regularly. Desklids, blanket chest tops, slides. Places where minimal movement/warp will cause problems with operation of locks, or binding. Oh, and sideboard doors, under the veneer.
Well, we've beat this horse sufficiently.
Take care,
Ray
The stuff I look at is early 18th c, mostly delaware valley. And I see what I said I saw.
Where are these pieces on display?
Good question! There isn't that much early 18th c, let alone early del valley but you can look in the usual places. My exposure comes from the museum where I volunteer (pennsbury manor), the Philadelphia Museum of Art whose collections I know tolerably well and some of the other house museums in the area like Stenton Hall. Of course I've been to all of the museums in the area including Winterthur, the MET, etc several times and I tend to look specifically at early work for these issues (because the subject interests me).
In the 10 years I've been working wood and looking at old furniture, I don't recall seeing more than a few pieces with cupped or warped boards clamped or unclamped. I've seen a lot of cracks, including massive cracks in the Dominy secretary's lower carcass in Winterthur.
I'd say in the principle areas of concern- tables clamped and unclamped, carcasses, secretary desk lids, I see:
-monolithic slabs of clearly heart sawn wood or two bookmatched pieces of the same
-heart side up or out
-stable species like mahognay or walnut
-I recall a few small oval or round tea tables potato chipped, tops clearly chosen for figure.
That's my observations, thanks for the good question
Adam
Edited 7/17/2006 2:18 pm ET by AdamCherubini
Don! It's great to hear from you. Must be the new job is keeping you busy. Don't be a stranger here.
Primarily an esthetic / design decision. I wouldn't count on BB ends to keep a table flat if it really wants to cup. Personally, I like them on informal table designs, but it's a matter of taste.
DR
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled