Replies

1. 
   Danford_C._Jennings | Jan 03, 2002 05:19am | #1

   *
   Alan,

   From your description, this sounds like a double tongue joint. Your reference of a "corner block" has me a tad confused.

   Are you trying to join a top to to a side that is integral to the carcase?

   Dano

1. 
   John_Casteen_ | Jan 03, 2002 05:41am | #2

   *I have puzzled on that one myself, with the same unwillingness to second-guess the man. I do feel ready to second-guess his illustrator, who may not have drawn the solid-wood variation to scale; the groove walls in the panel look too thin to be durable. If you imagine the joint with more meat there it starts to seem more credible. This joint would be easier to use on the top corners of a case in plywood, since the long grain of the panel is intended to be grooved-- making the joint on short grain would invite a split, I would think. As a frame-and panel joint, the corner posts would generally go on the four corners (verticals) of a case. Good luck.John CasteenFern Hill Furniture WorksEarlysville, Va.

1. 
   Danford_C._Jennings | Jan 03, 2002 06:39am | #3

   *Gentlemen,Obviously I do not have the text that this joint appears to be centered around. However, joinery methods are fairly static.A double tongue joint is a fairly common joint used in flush top carcase construction. The fundamental rule in such construction is that the joint be interlocking. In a joint where a "decorative" element is used, as I suspect is the case here, Joyce shows this joint (milled with the grain of the corner stock) with a mitre, the tongue having no shoulder on top. The tongue is of the normal proportion with it's bottom shoulder flush with inside surface of the adjoining side. The bottom tongue is of normal proportions. This joint can be used in solid or ply material, with the exception of solid stock where the grain of top and sides are at opposition to one another. "Reversing" this joint will weaken it, in my view. In sketching out this joint "reversed"; it appears to me that the forces would be vectored outward as opposed to vectored toward the center of the stock, as I envision Mr. Frid showing this joint. You should be confident in the strength of the joint, given that accepted joinery methods were used through out.The only question in my mind at this point, would be the dimensions of the stock in question to provide a solution to milling it out safely.Personally, I believe that the "genius" of Mr. Frid, Mr. Maloof and others lies in their ability to "modify" traditional joinery to accomodate their designs with out affecting the integrity and strength of the joint's original purpose. FWIW.Dano

1. 
   Alan_Mahrenholz | Jan 07, 2002 09:17am | #4

   *Thanks for the responses - in view of John's remarks I am rethinking my choice of joinery for this bookcase but am not quite ready to give up. His comment that it is best for vertical joints in carcass work suggests a weakness in placing it at the top of a bookcase. Unfortunately, I've confused Dano and in an attempt to clarify my question, I've attached a crude drawing of the intended joint that roughly corresponds to what appears in Mr. Frid's book. I want to build a radius into the top corners of the bookcase as indicated by the dotted lines on the corner "block". I would welcome any further comments.Thanks