English Drawers, question?

Re: English Drawers, question?

david charlesworth


>Bill,

Before about 1713 all drawer bottoms ran from front to back, ie the wrong way and most ended up splitting, often repaired with cloth and hot glue.

Then someone realized something about wood movement, and they started doing it right.

Thin Drawer sides, 5/16" quartered oak, were normal on high quality furniture during the Walnut period and after.

I show the type of drawer making I was taught in 1971, in my second book, page 26 onwards. This method is called a French bottom by some, and is the smartest method used in the arts and crafts tradition. The glued on slips provide extra running surface and the scratch bead, (possibly with muntin on heavily loaded wide drawers) look very smart.

The extra drawer slips you saw may well have been added by a restorer and are not necessarily fitted correctly!

best wishes,

David Charlesworth

ps I am not a restorer and that date may not be spot on but is close!.....

Re: English Drawers, question? *LINK*

Sgian Dubh


>Bill, here's how I do drawers. In traditional work where the drawer bottoms run between runners and kickers I always include slips. I seldom make drawers of this type with the drawer bottom groove cut directly into the side. For fine work the thickness of the side this type of construction requires I find inelegant, but that's just my opinion. I generally reserve thick sides (12 mm or so, 1/2") for drawers mounted on slides, as the linked text goes on to describe.

Only one type of slip is shown in the attached link. Here there is a wee tenon worked at the front end of the slip that engages with the groove in the drawer front. At the back the slip is notched to go under the drawer back. This is what precisely locates the slip position relative to the bottom edge of the drawer side.

In another form the top edge of the slip and the top face of the drawer bottom are flush. This form uses a thicker drawer bottom with offset tongues. I don't have an image handy online to illustrate it, but a bit of googling might find you an example. Slainte.


Drawer making

Re: English Drawers, question? (*pics)

GolfSteve in Calgary


>Hi Bill. Here's a shot of the rear of a drawer I made using drawer slips. I got the idea from Charlesworth's book. On this table the drawer bottom was around 3/8" thick. The slips were simply glued to the drawer sides. You can see that I used an offset rabbet to house the drawer bottom on the sides. At the front on the drawer bottom there was also a tongue, but it was offset towards the top.

If you plan ahead slips are easy to add. Make your slips out of the same stock you make the drawer sides from. When dimensioning the boards for your drawer sides, leave some extra height which you will later cut off and then glue back on a slips. David Charlesworth's book has a nice description of of how to efficiently add slips to a drawer.

I really like slips. They help keep the drawer sides strong, they add extra bearing surface, and they look good.

Here's a shot of slips on a different drawer being glued in place:

And a shot of the interior view of the drawer. This drawer had an aromatic cedar bottom. I have never used a bead between the slips and the drawer bottom, but I think I will try it on a future drawer:

And a view from the bottom:

As for tiny dovetails, I think they were simply a style. I have seen many drawers from furniture made in the late 1800's (mostly in Australa). Many of the drawers also employed slips. Some of those drawers are in as good a shape today and they would have been 150 years ago.

Thanks all

bill tindall


>A picture is indeed worth a thousand words. How have I not discovered this way of making drawers for so long! Is there a disadvantage I fail to see? I Need to get that book.

Thanks for the date, David *LINK*

Andrew F in Australia


>I knew that early furniture had the drawer bottoms aligned correctly and that it was somewhere before the golden age of furniture.

appreciate the information.

Bill, linked below is an answer to Wiley Horne when he asked an identical question.

The missing text in the post is:

http://www.woodcentral.com/cgi-bin/handtools.pl?frames;read=91236

the main difference ... ... ... is that the top of the drawer bottom is located 3/4" vertically from the running surfaces of drawer as shown in the picture below

also some more details at:

http://www.woodcentral.com/cgi-bin/handtools.pl?frames;read=91219

Cheers,

Andrew


http://www.woodcentral.com/cgi-bin/handtools.pl?fr

Re: English Drawers, question? (*pics)

david charlesworth


>Steve,

great pictures, nice job!

Thank you,

David

Re: English Drawers, question?

Adam Cherubini, NJ


>DC,

In your attempt to be succinct you really misrepresented those early craftsmen.

Before about 1713 all drawer bottoms ran from front to back, ie the wrong way and most ended up splitting, often repaired with cloth and hot glue.

Then someone realized something about wood movement, and they started doing it right.

I think they knew more about wood movement than most modern woodworkers (present company excluded). Not sure where the date came from but I'll play along. Before 1713, drawer bottoms were generally nailed on (up from underneath). There was going to be cross grain problem somewhere. So they nailed up into a rabbet in the drawer front, across the back, and down the sides. The bottoms were often QS, many appear to have been riven, in fact they may well have been shingles, in fact we've actually seen shingles used by 18th c craftsmen! So these riven pieces were very stable and probably stayed together for a very long time before they cracked.

The under drawer runners discussed here I think were intended to save the drawer dividers from the thin drawer sides used by those cheap Englishmen! (Can't blame the Scots for this one). While English drawer sides from the 18th c are typically half the thickness of American sides, many yanks put the runners on as well.

Early 18th drawer bottoms (regardless of their orientation) were also often nailed up from underneath. The applied runners may have been necessary to cover the nail heads that would destroy the drawer dividers. Keep in mind that even lipped drawers were always flat on the the bottom. So a chewed up divider would show.

This wasn't a problem with side hung 17th century drawers- similar construction- no runners.

Later 18th c some drawer bottoms were let into grooves in the drawer sides. These drawer bottoms almost always ran parallel to the front. I think if the drawer side was thin, they'd add runners. Or if they were worried, they'd add runners. I say some because the guys in Rhode island continued nailing their bottoms on. Thet had a funny way of doing it too. I heard it explained in Wmsburg and Greene has it in his excellent book (I hope you all have a copy before it goes out of print). They beveled the edges of the bottom then nailed it in place. Then they planed the same bevel into the runner and glued it on. I never understood exactly why they would do this and I'm still not sure. What I can say is that it is the most efficient design to maximize the usable depth of the drawer. It allowed thin drawer side stock.

Not sure if I answered Bill's question or not, but I wanted just to tag on to your post to say this was complicated, and well thought out business. I know I don't understand it all and I'm guessing it wasn't your intention to dismiss these old designs. Those guys really knew what they were doing but they were inevitably reacting to their unique situation and materials available.

In a nut shell, I think the runners were applied to save the dividers (not the drawer runners- who cares about them) from either nails or thin hard drawer sides.

Adam

Makes for better placement of grooves too...

Paul Kierstead


>I would seem to me that one of the advantages of the runner is the placement of the groove. If you are running your groove all the way from front to back, this can make the first half-pin a little thin or the bottom a little up when you try to run the groove through the tail. Using runners can alleviate this it would seem though your would need something in the front too...

What is the name of that excellent book?

Ian Smith (Sydney Australia)


>G'day Adam,

What is the excellent book by Greene that you refer to in your post?

Regards,

Ian.

Re: What is the name of that excellent book?

Adam Cherubini


>"American Furniture of the 18th Century" by Jeffrey Greene

I think this is the best book on 18th c casework ever written.

Adam

Thanks Adam.

Ian Smith (Sydney Australia)

Re: English Drawers, question?

bill tindall


>"In a nut shell, I think the runners were applied to save the dividers (not the drawer runners- who cares about them) from either nails or thin hard drawer sides."

Makes sense. A thin oak side would have been like a saw rubbing on the divider.

agreed

bill tindall


>I recently discovered it. Very helpful on construction, etc.

Re: English Drawers, question?

Adam Cherubini


>A couple more nutshells-

Seems like the nailed up drawer bottom allowed for a strong/thick bottom while optimizing drawer interior space. The alternative requires thicker sides to house the groove (unless that whole piece is applied- is that DC's approach?). Its beyond me to say which is a better design. I don't see either as clearly superior. The evolution of drawer design may have more to do with the deforestation of England and the price of oak than the development of a structurally better drawer.

The whole runner thing also allowed for E-Z drawer height adjustment. Without them, you really need to get the drawer sides right.

Adam

Re: English Drawers, question?

Sgian Dubh


>In some quarters Bill it's argued that the drawer side material and the slips should be made out of something softer than the runners and kickers. It makes sense because it's always easier to work on a drawer (that's easily got out of the cabinet) and replace the slips than it is to repair a worn out runner (which requires the restorer to ferret about inside a cramped carcase.) Slainte.

Re: English Drawers, question?

Sgian Dubh


>I don't understand what you are describing Adam. Runners and kickers are the horizontal framing parts of the cabinet and therefore there's no adjustment possible with them.

Slips are attached to the bottom inside edge of the drawer side. They don't make it any easier to final fit drawers. True, the slip may be made so that it sits just a little below the bottom edge of the drawer side. They're simply flushed off to match the bottom edge. The shooting of a drawer to fit the opening is achieved by planing the top edge of the side and the top edge of the drawer front. Also the ends of the drawer front are flushed off with the drawer side-- you'll see why in a moment.

Drawer sides are normally taper fitted to the cabinet opening before even any drawer dovetailing is done. Drawer sides will only go home about 7/8 of the way before construction. Drawer backs are cut about 0.5 mm narrower than the opening width to ensure they never cause the drawer to jam.

Drawer fronts are planed square on the bottom edge in relation to the front and back face, the top edge is bevelled slightly down to the back face, and the two ends are slightly bevelled towards the back face. The drawer front will only go in to the opening about half or 3/4's of the way at the setting out phase. It's only after the whole drawer is constructed that the final fit is done.

Drawers are ever so slightly trapezium shaped in plan. The front and back are parallel. The two sides angle towards each other ever so slightly from front to back.

This is just how I was taught to do truly premium hand dovetailed drawer making. It's the way I teach my learners. It's not the only approach as others prefer slightly different methods-- but it works for me. And half the time going to these extremely pernickety ends to make a drawer just isn't worth the candle. Sloppy Joe will do with a gap of 1 mm or so around the front. However, if a maker decides they are going to go to these extremes to make a drawer then the cost racks up very fast. They are very demanding, require a deal of skill and patience and you need clients with deep pockets-- there's not too many of those about, so that's where Sloppy Joe comes into play. Slainte.

No wish to misrepresent anyone!

david charlesworth


>Adam,

Good stuff, thank you, I may well have been overhasty!

Will have to go and look up that date, which I think was in Hayward.

Possibly these bottoms survived very well until the ravages of better heating, central heating or A/C.

I have seen many examples split and repaired with cloth and hot glue.

best wishes,

David

Re: Slips

Adam Cherubini,NJ


>Thanks Richard- slip is the word I wanted. Yeah you can adjust a little with the slip. It can lift the drawer bottom off the divider a little which can be nice. Don't know if they did this in the 18th c.

As to the other stuff about trapeziodal drawers, Bill's question was about traditional English stuff and I don't think trapezoidal drawers are part of that tradition.

I've made drawers like you say (though probably not as nice as yours) and I personally didn't care for them. Its more work and I don't like the way it felt opening and having the sideways gap opening up. I did this for a wide drawer.

Though I don't like it and there's no indication that 18th c guys did it, that doesn't mean its a bad idea or in any way invalid.

Adam

Re: Slips

Sgian Dubh


>I think you're right Adam. A lot of old British made drawers I bet were made pretty sloppy in the first place. There's a lot of old oak rusticated furniture about still, and a lot of pretty crude construction to go with it.

But for the most part British made drawers with slips I'd guess were at least trying to be a little better made. Some drawers with slips were obviously exceptionally well crafted. I can't say if cabinetmakers in the 1700's messed about much with trapezium shapes and tapering drawer sides and so on. I'd be surprised if they did for most work, or, perhaps any work.

Getting that pernickety with drawer making can be done, but in truth I think it's usually more bother than it's really worth. Often a slightly looser drawer runs better---- and it doesn't get stuck in the summer either, ha, ha. Slainte.

Not misrepresenting, as far as I know

Andrew F in Australia


>Hi All,

I recall the same approximate date range as one of the guiding factors in when an antique was made from my (trade cabinetmaking) training, David. it was somewhere about the William and Mary period from memory, and the date you gave coincided with somewhere about where I was trained.

The Australian trade practise closely mirrors the UK guild system, where we are trained to do the same thing as RJ describes to a tee,

Cheers,

Andrew

Andrew, thank you, David

david charlesworth