Why dowels, not M&T for a Krenov cabinet

4 more debatable reasons

Adam Cherubini

>4) As the vertical rail shrinks widthwise, the bond line between vertical rail and the horizontal dowel is stressed. Failure at this glue-only joint is imminent. In a mortise and tenon joint, you have the exact same thing, except when a draw bore peg is used to preload the joint.

5) Dowelled pieces can be difficult to repair, especially where PVA glues have been used.

6) Its arguable how much strength a dowel adds. Remember that PVA needs high bondline pressure to achieve full bond strength. Don’t know of anyway to clamp a dowelled joint. If the fit is tight enough to provide the required pressure, its probably going to extrude out the glue during fit up. The only place you can ensure both glue and bondline pressure is at the end grain to face grain butt joint between the stile and rail. In this case, isn’t the dowel just an alignment feature? Why not just use a biscuit?

7) Lastly, I think there’s an inherent advantage to not changing the plan every time you build a new piece. The traditional craftsman probably saw very little repetition (save coffins). Its not like they built chest after chest after chest. But were we to ask them, I suspect they’d say how boring and repetitious their work was. Just the same three or four joints day after day, dovetails, mortise and tenon, dadoes, and rabbets. In my mind, this elegant woodworking system is worth buying into and stickling with. Its stood the test of time. We'll see how Krenov furniture fares.

Adam

Re: Why dowels, not M&T for a Krenov cabinet

Ed Snow

>Having studied there, I still know no difinitive answer. I recently asked them this exact question and recieved an, "I guess it would work just as well if it fit nicely. "

So I tried it, it works alright but it took longer to get as nice a fit as I wanted. As a result I thought about it quite a bit before I came up with my explanation. Which has many parts.

1. The doweled joint is faster.

2. The doweled joint is stronger in a system that undergoes torsion, which is what happens to the carcass when a door is opened. The reason it is stronger lies in the fact that the female side (the male side is the side where the the dowels lie parallel with the grain) of the doweled joint has more meat to prevent the entire shoulder breaking off.

3. The fit is always tight since one should always compress their oversided dowels to some degree.

4. Doweling is more versatile.

Do what you want if it feels strong it should be strong enough.

Re: Why dowels, not M&T for a Krenov cabinet

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>Are you talking about hand made dowels/trenails from the same wood as the sides and top? Then I'd say OK, maybe so. In this case they'd be essentially loose tenons.

But if you're talking about off-the-shelf dowels, with short grain and different woods, I'd like to disagree. In that case the M&T will have a lot more strength, particularly, as Adam said, if they are pinned.

Pam

Are we not talking about carcasses?

Ed Snow

>I was under the impression that Bill was referring to the use of dowels in carcass construction. In which case he is as right as I or anybody. Dowels are not a solid choice for the joinery requirements of frame and panel or rail on post construction of the sub frames. There a pinned mortice and tenon makes sense.

However, dowels are an incredibly useful type of joinery; which I feel gets a certain shoddy stigma applied. When in truth they are not so much different than a floating tenon. This is unforutnate as they are so much more versatile than other types of joinery and often an easy and rapid solution to any worker.

Indeed

bill tindall

>We are talking about a small box loaded with a few trinkets that hangs undisturbed on the wall in nonearthquake prone E. TN. I have glued-mitered picture frames that carry more load on the joints.

Krenov is Krenov

Ron in Kokomo

>There is no way that I would presume to say anything negative about his work. Most of his pieces that I have seen are relatively light and not subject to a great deal of stress. I still lack the understanding to know why M & T joints would not be better. If one is concerned about production time, there are jigs for the production of floating M and T joints that would seem to me to be to be just as "quick" as dowelled joints. It may well be that Krenov would indeed use M and T joints if he felt that the use of the piece called for it.

Re: Are we not talking about carcasses?

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>I was under the impression that Bill was referring to the use of dowels in carcass construction. In which case he is as right as I or anybody. Dowels are not a solid choice for the joinery requirements of frame and panel or rail on post construction of the sub frames. There a pinned mortice and tenon makes sense.

Me, too, definitely carcass construction. I'm not saying Bill is wrong, there are so many ways to build cabinets; but I am saying that off-the-shelf dowells are inferior, short grained and of a different wood. And I bet eventually the wood surface shows the dowells, just like biscuits.

When in truth they are not so much different than a floating tenon.

This is also what I said/meant, although I called it a loose tenon, not sure why, probably picked it up here.

Pam

Re: Krenov is Krenov

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>There is no way that I would presume to say anything negative about his work.

I disagree that having this discussion is negative. I say if you can't discuss Krenov's methods you may as well just kneel down, bowing to the man, not learning anything about his methods, slavishly copying him. This is a real problem I have with some power tool junkies: you're a heathen if you say the least little thing bad about Norm, not even discussable, everything he does is golden.

Pam

Re: Krenov is Krenov

Glenn Madsen in the SF Bay area

>I read it as a search for understanding of why an acknowledged luminary does it 'his way'.

I liked Ed's comments. Not everything has to be done Jim's way. At least in _your_ shop.

But the discussion and the learning is enjoyable, and positive.

Re: Krenov is Krenov

Ron in Kokomo

>WHOA....Pam I neither said nor implied that you shouldn't criticize Krenov. I simply said I wasn't going to, and like Ed says I have not had the opportunity to talk with him about it to understand why he prefers dowels... and his work sells for a heck of a lot more than mine would... so I do not think it appropriate for me ( whose work you haven't seen to criticize the work of an icon in our craft)

I do understand your point.... but one of the things I do not care for on the net is the opportunity it presents for persons who've browsed the web and read a few magazines to become "experts" who are entitled to have opinions about the work of Maloof, Krenov, Klausz, Dunbar, Boggs, etc...when they haven't ever actually made anything more than a candle box. I so enjoy and value the postings of persons like Mr. Duffield, and a few others because we have had opportunities to view their work and get some idea about the experiences that form their opinions.

Just my .02

Just my .02

Yep, I agree, Glenn.

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>

Re: expertise, dowels, and Sir Wm

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>Ron, I'm not setting myself up as some sort of expert; although I do have some minor expertise, I wouldn't say it's in cabinet construction; although I have made cabinets that are holding together in spite of my lack of expertise and shoddy construction methods used. The Dunbars and his cohorts aren't going to be entering discussions here, nor are they likely to criticize, discuss, or even question Krenov in public; so if we want to discuss Krenov's methods we'll have to do it ourselves.

You seem to appreciate Sir Wm as an expert. I do, too. So perhaps he'll weigh in here on off-the-shelf dowels.

Pam

Re: Krenov is Krenov

Moses Yoder in White Pigeon, MI

>I fail to understand what brings some people to fame and fortune while others rot in the shadows. I think perhaps it is a combination of passion and luck. There are large numbers of people who are better woodworkers and know more about the wood and the art than people like Klausz or Krenov or Norm, that will never see the spotlight, and perhaps they have no desire to.

Re: Krenov is Krenov

Ron in Kokom0

>Now that is a whole different question that probably edges too close to "the meaning of life" for this forum. I certainly do agree with you though

Re: expertise, dowels, and Sir Wm

William Duffield, on the Cohansey

>First off, I totallyagree with Ed's picture. As I noted in another thread on the same subject, long tenons do not work very well for carcase construction, even though I suggested them in my rant, for just the reasons that Ed mentions. Biscuits have the same problem. Wiley's M&T joint I think is structurally stronger, for the reasons I also noted elsewhere, but is way more difficult to do. Loose, or floating, tenons have one of the same structural flaws as dowels, due to the void at the bottom of the dowel or tenon in the carcase side board. Probably, if the joint fails due to trauma, it will not fail there, because there are other failure points in the joint that are weaker, but it is another failure point to be considered. Assuming closely fitting dowels and good glue, the dowel-to-carcase-side half of the joint should not pose significant problems. However, the dowel-to-carcase-top (or dowel-to-carcase-bottom) is significantly weaker than the equivalent, tightly fitted M&T, because there is very little face-grain-to-face-grain surface in the hole in the top. Most of the hole is end grain or at a significant angle, at best no better than a butt miter joint. The joint Wiley showed is much better, assuming it is very precisely cut, so there is good face-grain-to-face-grain contact on the END of every tenon. Note that in the usual M&T construction (e.g., frame and panel, or apron to table leg, etc.), the fit of this face of the mortise is totally insignificant, as long as the mortise is shorter than the tenon. This means that those who are used to regular M&T joints may need to develop a whole new discipline to do this type of joinery effectively. So, Krenov's method has some significant advantages in speed and flexibility.

I suppose the main reason I distrust dowels is that In the bad old days, dowels joints were put together with inferior glues. As the cross-grain joint expanded and contracted over several seasons, the joint opens up, pulling the dowels out a little bit at a time. The dowels then effectively hold the shoulders apart, allowing racking. You get a lot more time with yellow glue because it remains flexible, but eventually the joint will have to be rebuilt, and I really don't like rebuilding joints filled with yellow glue.

Off-the-shelf dowels are another major headache, as they are seldom of consistent diameter. Did I say diameter? In many cases, you could hardly call it that. I've seen loaves of bread that were rounder than some "dowels", that appear to have been machined between two half round beading router bits, that were very imprecisely aligned. It is much better to use a dowel plate that is matched to your drill bit.

Note that I have built these carcase joints with biscuits, and I have even made mitered frames with biscuits. I know now that this sort of joinery has its problems, but so far, even these abysmal joints have held in these old projects. So maybe I'm just talking about archival processing, or maybe I'm just making a mountain out of a molehill.

fame

Tom Sontag - St. Louis

>Moses,

Each of the three people you mention are famous because of media exposure. Luck plays a role in getting them the exposure, but our thirst for what they offer virtually guarantees that SOMEONE out there will build a reputation for commmunicating to us. Media is getting more diverse, but it still can make or break kings of a sort.

Geez this is dumb -- rant mode

MikeW

>Moses,

Your message was handy, so I picked it. It reflects a sentiment I have heard often. You say there are "large numbers of people who are better woodworkers and know more about the wood and the art than people like Klausz or Krenov or Norm."

Leaving out Norm, name 3 people you know who know more about wood and the art than Klausz--and actually make things. Do the same for Krenov without repeating the list of three from before.

Was it an easy list of just 6 names? Would they honestly agree with your inclusion of them in this list? Can you make a list that would objectively be even called "large numbers"?

Now don't get me wrong. There may well be. I think it would be Krenov's assumption that there are people who work with wood "better" than him--whether he could quantify it or not.

I am not familiar with Klausz' work. I am with Krenov's. I of course have no idea what you mean by "better." Perhaps you could elaborate. I suspect it will involve a subjectivity in its assessment, though you state it with such an authoritative tone.

I too have my own opinions about his work. But, they are just that. My opinions, based upon a subjective sensibility which may or may not appreciate his work.

But his work hasn't fallen apart as far as I know, which is more to the point of the thread. And he does use different types of joints in cabinet construction. Though I don't see what all this hoopla is about as concerns using dowels anyway.

Who here has made, say, a display or wall cabinet using dowels this year? 5 years ago? 10 or more? Have any of those cabinets failed at the joints (assuming responsible care by the owners of said cabinet)?

If you haven't made something in this manner which has either failed or passed the test of time, why bother weighing in saying it is an inferior or acceptable method?

I'll pass along a comment I heard last week

Denis Chénard, Orléans, Ont.

>I was at a seminar given by Garrett Hack at Rosewood Studio. At one point he was talking about what makes a woodworker successful.

I'll never forget what he said then:

"There are many people out there who are better woodworkers than me but can't make it financially in this field, whereas there are others that are not as good a woodworker as I am yet make a lot more money"

After the seminar, when I asked him privately if he had people in mind when he made that statement, he declined to answer out of politeness (I assume).

But when someone like Hack makes that kind of statement, I find it quite refreshing and honest.

Think of it this way: if there are no students who can surpass their "master" then we are in trouble...

DC

Re: I'll pass along a comment I heard last week

Dave Anderson Chester, NH

>Dennis- I have had the good fortune to know Garrett well for a number of years. He has NEVER in all that time had anything bad to say about anyone. Inside of that somewhat laid back and "hick" persona he exudes lies a very fine and well tuned mind backed by both common sense and a fine education. He realizes quite well that any negative opinions he expresses become part of the public domain and doesn't want the aggravation and bad feelings it can reap.

One aspect you may be overlooking

BarbS

>is what is known as "a body of work." That there are hundreds, maybe thousands of woodworkers with superior skills means little when compared to the complete body of work accomplished by the names you mention. Now Norm is in another league...television. And he has his purpose, but I doubt he'd compare himself to Krenov and Klausz. Television fame is a different thing. Krenov's work has gained a reputation very simply by its rather universal appeal. Klausz, if you are unfamiliar with his work, has had several very complicated, sophisticated pieces in FWW and every other magazine, I believe, over many years. The point is, they both have developed a body of work, put it out there in public, and are recognized for it. Luck may have had very little to do with it. -BarbS.

Re: I'll pass along a comment I heard last week

MikeW

>Hi Denis,

The whole issue of who makes what is moot anyway. Every last one of us deserves what we can sell a piece for. There will always be people who can make more than I. More power to them. I wouldn't know what to do if I experienced 15 minutes of fame in woodworking, but great if it is you or whoever. It happens in every field and type of business.

The issue of the topic has to do with a construction method.

As with other woodworking topics, using dowel joints in cabinet construction is obviously one where there is great misinformation based upon hearsay, historical prejudice, and shear personal opinion--admittedly so in some cases.

I do not build using dowels often. I don't think they are an appropriate joint (personal opinion/choice) for much of what I make. But I have used dowels for certain work long before I knew who Krenov even was (just actually read one of his books for the first time last fall).

I live in my own little world. I go out in the shop first thing in the morning and build things. This client tells someone and they contact me. I put up a web site this late spring due to one of my son's encouragement. I don't have time to update it. I don't care to "get my name" out there--wherever that is.

I do know that having used dowels for casework such as Krenov (and some his other methods for casework) and having had some of these pieces hold together for over a decade or so (nothing I have built has a joint that has failed, regardless of the joint), someone will have to have something other than "Gee, I don't think it's a strong method" "short-grain vs. long-grain" theories that they themselves have not tested in order to consider the information.

Oh well. I probably shouldn't have reacted to Moses' statement. Other than a weak challenge in the previous threads Bill has started to discuss the use of dowels, I've have kept my mouth shut. I'm glad at least Bill has considered the validity of dowels following his personal exposure to them being done correctly.

MikeW

Quite an assumption

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>"short-grain vs. long-grain" theories that they themselves have not tested in order to consider the information.

Oh well. I probably shouldn't have reacted to Moses' statement. Other than a weak challenge in the previous threads Bill has started to discuss the use of dowels, I've have kept my mouth shut. I'm glad at least Bill has considered the validity of dowels following his personal exposure to them being done correctly.

I think it's quite an assumption that no one posting here besides Wm has tested dowel strength. Just use one, see how easily the off-the-shelf dowels break at the slightest provocation, how badly they're dimensioned. It's obvious when they're made of a different wood than is being used in the piece.

Pam

Krenov Explained "Why" in His Book!

George Bustamante

>Am I missing something here?

I cannot rember if it was his first or second book, but Krenov discusses the why of using dowels in a particular piece - why not refer to his reasons? He also discussed the cons, of using dowels, and does not use them for everything, or even most of his work.

Second, Krenov used a horizontal mortiser, which even in its most basic form, let's you do fast, very accurate work.

George Bustamante

Actually ..... more data

bill tindall

>Actually I started this post with the why's from the statements made from a professional cabinet maker that 1. studied at the college for 2 years( and presumably learned all about the whys from the master's knee) and 2. makes a living making these things. From this information one could conclude that he should know something about the history of this joint (from college) and has some practical experience with it. I would like to add some additional information...

The dowels Pam, these are not the 3' birch dowels from the lumber yard. The are furniture factory construction dowels made to hold things together (they prefer the fluted variety). So, the concerns about roundness, and cross grain are not valid. And, owning a set of letter drills readily solves the correct hole size problem. Part of the class was learning to sharpen these metals drills with a brad/spur point as well as sizing the hole to the dowel at hand. In the class we drilled 0.254" holes for the commercial made dowels and I found the same size worked for my dowels.

strength Eckelman, Purdue Exp. station tech bulletin 3965 A well made 2 dowel joint ( a 5" deep Krenov cabient has 7 dowels!!) survived 10,000,000 stress cycles at a torsion load of 1,000 inch pounds which was 1/6 of the ultimate joint strength. I do not believe a wall cabinet will ever see a load that will approach this test, or even be in the same universe.

One of the whys (maybe the most important) the critics have overlooked is the multitude of dry asemblies required to fit the sides to the door, especially an inset door, and the knife hinges. This is done with two sacrificial dowels per joint which are discarded before final assemble. M&T's are well worn by the end of this process, at least in my one time experience.

Finally, while at the school David said they used a horizontal mortiser for hole drilling, he gets better accuracy with a hand drill as illustrated in the picture on the class review post.

If there remains any question that 7x4 (corners) dowels will hold together a piddly 5" deep wall cabinet I'll make up a joint and get it pulled apart on an Instron to see how strong it is. But first someone needs to put up the money to bet whether it will hold a few trinkets or even a rock or two from my mineral collection. Folks were aren't building a 7 drawer dresser here(for which I would never use dowels).