Re: Frame and Panel Size
Adam Cherubini, NJ
>That is a good question. And I can offer my two cents, but first we should clarify a few things:
The problem is not joint failure, but the cracking of that wide side piece. Even if that happens, the furniture will live on for centuries. There are many, many examples of this in the public domain. The cracks usually don�t continue across the entire length.
We see these joints often. Chippendale/Queen Anne style furniture often has side pieces easily in excessive of 12�. I copied a semi-boarded William and Mary chest which fastened a 16� board cross grain.
Modern woodworkers armed with a little information have railed against these joints. They point to them (in all hubris) to elucidate the mistakes of period workmen. There have been discussions by notables about whether they should reproduce such �mistakes�.
The reality is that a single crack doesn�t make a piece of furniture a failure. We really have no idea what will happen to our glue, our joinery in 200 years. But most importantly, 18th century workmen understood the problem and took steps to prevent it:
1) They chose quartersawn stock (or rift heart sawn stock) for such boards.
2) They protected end grain
3) I suspect (though there�s no way of knowing) that they also preloaded their joints (like a spring joint). Forcing slightly tapered tenons into mortises is one way they could have done it.
We should view surviving pieces as examples of the superiority of their particular joinery and not view the relatively few cracks caused by cross grain joinery as �mistakes�. I�m dedicated to these older styles esthetically, but for those of you who prefer modern styles, I think you should at least familairize yourselves with what was done, and how it was accomplished. That way you have a starting place.
Adam
