Thread: Timber sizing vs drawings vs availability

You have answered your own question

You have to go with the wood you have to work with. Nobody will notice a couple of thou. As long as you check at the store they are reasonably strait and you wont need to remove more than a skim to make things look good. You'r other option of the 30mm stock sounds very wasteful. If they had 50mm (45 even)that you could get 2 boards out of then yes go that way.
Regards
John

...indeed.. i guess in the good old days, if the table stops stuff hitting the hard deck then it's a good table . i bet they didn't fuss over a few thou or even a few mm..

Cheers

Also for a lot of elements of a build you really only need one face and an edge to be good, especially if you are mainly using hand tools. If the timber is straight, big if, then you probably will only need to refine one side.

It also depend on the joinery you use and particularly the method used. Most hand tool woodworkers mar sizes directly from the mating piece so size does not matter. But if you wanted to use a power router for example you probably want to have a close match between bit size and stock thickness.

Bruce

Seems funny to read of working wood in thousandths of inch .
What ever works though .

Old standard practice was to take rough sawn one inch and dress down to 3/4 " That leaves 3/8 for a tenon and 3/8 to the face . So in the leg of the piece your left with 3/8"to its front if the leg and rail are to be flush when finished. Anything coming off the 3/4 rail is then reducing the strength of the leg join if your sticking to 3/8 tenons . 1 or 2mm shouldn't matter so much . You can shift the rail back in a mm which is what I do all the time . Not for leg strength but because the step back looks good, better IMHO, its faster to make and its stronger slightly .

Plenty of old stuff is rough as B inside and is much more interesting to look at and read than perfect flat machined even surfaces. Reading how the stock was dimensioned and the tools used and stuff like that. So being exactly like the plan doesn't matter.

It did matter when a teacher was giving us a plan to build something at trade school and he wants to see I can produce what he's given Me to do I suppose.

Converting wanted sizes from larger stock is the way its done but buying to large and thinking your going to be OK by reaswing out what you want doesnt always work . Its a common thing to see resawn stuff change shape quite a bit when being cut out of larger pieces. If I was aiming for 3/4 (19mm) finished out of 1 1/2 (38mm) timber I saw the wanted side at 1" (25.4mm) take a look to see how much its cupped then machine (Buzz and thickness). If it didnt cup much then I may resaw at 22mm rather than 25mm aiming for my 19mm . The rest is waste or good for drawer bottom or side material . It comes down to the wood you are using on the day .

Originally Posted by Fuzzie

Also for a lot of elements of a build you really only need one face and an edge to be good, especially if you are mainly using hand tools. If the timber is straight, big if, then you probably will only need to refine one side.

thats actually a very good point indeed, I hadn't considered that. Thanks

Originally Posted by auscab

Seems funny to read of working wood in thousandths of inch .
What ever works though .

Old standard practice was to take rough sawn one inch and dress down to 3/4 " That leaves 3/8 for a tenon and 3/8 to the face . So in the leg of the piece your left with 3/8"to its front if the leg and rail are to be flush when finished. Anything coming off the 3/4 rail is then reducing the strength of the leg join if your sticking to 3/8 tenons . 1 or 2mm shouldn't matter so much . You can shift the rail back in a mm which is what I do all the time . Not for leg strength but because the step back looks good, better IMHO, its faster to make and its stronger slightly .

Plenty of old stuff is rough as B inside and is much more interesting to look at and read than perfect flat machined even surfaces. Reading how the stock was dimensioned and the tools used and stuff like that. So being exactly like the plan doesn't matter.

It did matter when a teacher was giving us a plan to build something at trade school and he wants to see I can produce what he's given Me to do I suppose.

Converting wanted sizes from larger stock is the way its done but buying to large and thinking your going to be OK by reaswing out what you want doesnt always work . Its a common thing to see resawn stuff change shape quite a bit when being cut out of larger pieces. If I was aiming for 3/4 (19mm) finished out of 1 1/2 (38mm) timber I saw the wanted side at 1" (25.4mm) take a look to see how much its cupped then machine (Buzz and thickness). If it didnt cup much then I may resaw at 22mm rather than 25mm aiming for my 19mm . The rest is waste or good for drawer bottom or side material . It comes down to the wood you are using on the day .

Every time I come here I learn something - life is good

BTW I didn't literally mean thou, just meant "take a wee bit off" - I don't have time nor the desire to get that pedantic; if it looks good at the end of the day - job done.

Originally Posted by auscab

Seems funny to read of working wood in thousandths of inch . What ever works though . ...

Plenty of old stuff is rough as B inside and is much more interesting to look at and read than perfect flat machined even surfaces. Reading how the stock was dimensioned and the tools used and stuff like that. So being exactly like the plan doesn't matter. ...

Lots of old stuff, and not so old stuff, have chair bottoms, cabinet backs and bottoms, rail backs, etc, that are unfinished and show the cabinet makers autograph. You can see how he made the object.

I used to believe in this approach until the 1980's when I visited the Please be Seated exhibition in the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, USA. There was a simple chair made by Sam Maloof which had been finished to the silkiest, most sensual finish imaginable. The public was invited to actually sit on the exhibits - note title - and that chair was perfectly proportioned for my far from perfect physique. And the bottom of the chair was finished exactly the same as the visible parts. I changed my mind. You can sit on one of my chairs and not care how the bottom of the seat is finished, but I know!

If you have not heard of the Please be Seated exhibition, then please google. It was the show that created space for contemporary furniture in serious museums.

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

Lots of old stuff, and not so old stuff, have chair bottoms, cabinet backs and bottoms, rail backs, etc, that are unfinished and show the cabinet makers autograph. You can see how he made the object.

I used to believe in this approach until the 1980's when I visited the Please be Seated exhibition in the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, USA. There was a simple chair made by Sam Maloof which had been finished to the silkiest, most sensual finish imaginable. The public was invited to actually sit on the exhibits - note title - and that chair was perfectly proportioned for my far from perfect physique. And the bottom of the chair was finished exactly the same as the visible parts. I changed my mind. You can sit on one of my chairs and not care how the bottom of the seat is finished, but I know!

If you have not heard of the Please be Seated exhibition, then please google. It was the show that created space for contemporary furniture in serious museums.

To Me your saying your taste in design could be better .

Sam Maloof would have been good at making Wooden Dildos .

I wanted to put a link to Wooden Dildos to prove my point but as I carefully looked through the long page I googled ( Wooden Dildos ) I realized there was no way some of those images were suitable for this place . Pictures of people using them and all that .

Google Wooden Dildos and I think you will agree.

The search engines are to blame, they assume they know what you are looking for. A few years ago these search terms would have actually found what you were looking for, unfortunately not any more.

I've been to Lake Akan village in Hokkaido known for their wood carvings.

This Forum is soooo educational!

Originally Posted by auscab

To Me your saying your taste in design could be better .

Sam Maloof would have been good at making Wooden Dildos .

I wanted to put a link to Wooden Dildos to prove my point but as I carefully looked through the long page I googled ( Wooden Dildos ) I realized there was no way some of those images were suitable for this place . Pictures of people using them and all that .

Google Wooden Dildos and I think you will agree.

Now they would need to be properly finished on all sides.

Originally Posted by orraloon

Now they would need to be properly finished on all sides.

John

Finished perhaps, but not apparently "dressed all sides." (DAR)

Regards
Paul