Thread: WIP Shaker Workbench with Split Top

I've started making the middle row of drawers and have come across a dovetailing problem I haven't been able to find a satisfactory solution for and I was hoping for some guidance and solutions from the more experienced dovetailers in our community. Actually, I encountered the problem when building the bottom row of drawers but have only decided to share it with everyone after exhausting all the possible solutions I could think of.


20230109_112404.jpg









































20230109_182314.jpg












































In my never-ending quest to improve my joinery, I have been even more meticulous with my material prep, but my problem stems from a rookie mistake I made more than a year ago and not so much to do with inadequate preparation of my drawer components. My problem(s) stems from how I constructed the drawer faces, the different materials I used, and how they would behave with seasonal movement. It's kinda ridiculous when I write (type) it down, but to achieve the desired thickness and width, I've had to glue 6 pieces of Tassie Oak for the bottom row of drawers and 4 for the middle row of drawers. This does not include the drawer pulls/handles which is another 2 pieces. It wasn't something I had set out to do but something I decided to do when I realised the fiddleback Tas Oak I wanted to for the drawer faces were not going to be thick enough.......plus it seemed such a waste to use the full thickness and I thought I could maximise their mileage by doing what I did. In my defence my decision did meet my goals, but my inexperience meant I could not foresee how the panels would behave afterwards. I thought there would be a little bit of movement, given that I was laminating the FB TasOak, which is was quartersawn and well seasoned, with Bunnies-sourced plantation-grown and quartersawn Tas Oak. Boy was I wrong!In the first photo above, the figures written on the corners of the drawer face are the thickness measured with digital calipers. And that's after the bottom face has been flattened on my jointer and the two edges squared up. There's about a 3mm difference.


20230110_105922.jpg











































Here's a photo of one end to illustrate the problem.


20230110_111248.jpg
















































Luckily this particular problem isn't too difficult to solve with a handplane. My weapon of choice for this job is my HNT Gordon Jack Plane. The low-friction sole, 50 degree bed angle, and narrower blade makes it a better choice than my LN #5 1/2.

The trickier problem I have, and one I haven't been able to solve, comes up when I'm cutting the dovetail mortices in the pin boards.


20230102_140159 (1).jpg


















































When the mortices land in the section of the board that's constructed out of the plantation-grown Tas Oak from Bunnies, as shown in the above photo, then chopping the mortices is fairly simple as the plantation grown stuff behaves predictably. But as also illustrated by the above photo, the mortices aren't guaranteed to land on the plantation stuff after the boards have been re-flattened. In the above photo, the glue seam is quite evident and the back wall of the right mortice. In fact I've found that more of the mortices land on the FB Tas Oak than not and what I've found is the FB TAs Oak is so unpredictable and never behaves how I expect it to.


20230111_190955.jpg















































I outlined in my previous post of my method of using my trim router to hog out the waste. The photo above shows pretty much the unadulterated result from the router (at least the back wall).



20230111_191934.jpg











































The photos above is the usual result I get after making the final chopping down. Please note the huge gouge in the back wall due to the figure in the wood.


20230111_184947.jpg











































The last result was made with a newly sharpened to a mirror polish with a Japanese chisel. I tried to cut plumb without any undercut whatsoever. I've tried several solutions from narrower chisels to the widest I could fit in the mortices (42mm in the above photo). I found the wider chisel gave the better result. I've tried paring from the side, or at an angle, instead of chopping down but that didn't work either. I've also tried undercutting the 2nd last cut so that the final cut pretty much had no material underneath it, but this didn't work either because as shown in my result photo, the gouge would pretty much start from the top at the mark made by the marking gauge. In desperation, I've even resorted to using a rasp to make the top "cut" and undercutting the rest.


So far, I've been able to minimise this problem by closing up some of the gaps it has created when cleaning up the joints, but the results are not perfect and the joints aren't as crisp as what they can be. It's not as critical on this project, but there will be scenarios where I will need the mortice wall be perfectly plumb without any undercutting or huge voids/gouges caused during the cutting of the mortices.


So, is there anything else I can try? Other than using a router with a dovetail bit, is the only solution better material selection at the start of the project?




Cheers,
Mike

Originally Posted by KahoyKutter

... When the mortices land in the section of the board that's constructed out of the plantation-grown Tas Oak from Bunnies, as shown in the above photo, then chopping the mortices is fairly simple as the plantation grown stuff behaves predictably. But as also illustrated by the above photo, the mortices aren't guaranteed to land on the plantation stuff after the boards have been re-flattened. In the above photo, the glue seam is quite evident and the back wall of the right mortice. In fact I've found that more of the mortices land on the FB Tas Oak than not and what I've found is the FB TAs Oak is so unpredictable and never behaves how I expect it to. ...

Sorry, Mike, but I think that you have been the victim of the naming process for Australian timbers. I will try and explain.

For marketing purposes, different species of timber are often mixed together; these include:

• Victorian ash - mixture of alpine ash and mountain ash, and
• Tasmanian oak - mixture of alpine ash, mountain ash and messmate.

But it is not legislated anywhere and other species may go into the brew. "If it looks like Tas oak..." A reliable source in a Govt agency says they have detected up to 70 species in Tas oak. There are very few plantations growing the Tas oak components and very little, if any, is being harvested for sawn timber. Some thinnings go to the chippers.

But there is a very fast growing plantation eucalypt that was initially grown for the paper pulp market, but now the industry is trying to sell some as a sawn timber. Eucalyptus nitens, when forest grown has been called shining gum, but the marketers have renamed its plantation grown timber as "plantation oak" - rather confusing. You have almost certainly bought nitens, not Tas oak. This summary of the specifications of the species might be helpful.

Timber Specifications.jpg

You will note that nitens is marginally lighter and marginally softer than the other species, but that its tangetial shrinkage is much higher - it moves much more than the others with changes in moisture content or humidity.

PS: Whenever I buy Tas oak, I go through the rack and select out the messmate as I prefer its colour, grain pattern and hardness.

PS2: Bootles is much better than me at explaining this technical stuff.

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

Sorry, Mike, but I think that you have been the victim of the naming process for Australian timbers. I will try and explain.

For marketing purposes, different species of timber are often mixed together; these include:

• Victorian ash - mixture of alpine ash and mountain ash, and
• Tasmanian oak - mixture of alpine ash, mountain ash and messmate.

But it is not legislated anywhere and other species may go into the brew. "If it looks like Tas oak..." A reliable source in a Govt agency says they have detected up to 70 species in Tas oak. There are very few plantations growing the Tas oak components and very little, if any, is being harvested for sawn timber. Some thinnings go to the chippers.

But there is a very fast growing plantation eucalypt that was initially grown for the paper pulp market, but now the industry is trying to sell some as a sawn timber. Eucalyptus nitens, when forest grown has been called shining gum, but the marketers have renamed its plantation grown timber as "plantation oak" - rather confusing. You have almost certainly bought nitens, not Tas oak. This summary of the specifications of the species might be helpful.

Timber Specifications.jpg

You will note that nitens is marginally lighter and marginally softer than the other species, but that its tangetial shrinkage is much higher - it moves much more than the others with changes in moisture content or humidity.

PS: Whenever I buy Tas oak, I go through the rack and select out the messmate as I prefer its colour, grain pattern and hardness.

PS2: Bootles is much better than me at explaining this technical stuff.

Thanks for your reply, Graeme. I was aware that "Tas Oak" is a marketing term encompassing several species but I assumed that the reason it has become widely accepted is because the species that are categorised as Tas Oak all have very similar appearances and properties. I gather from your post that was a wrong assumption on my part. I wish I had the skill of determining the particular species from sight. Judging by the table you have provided, my preference would be for Mountain Ash or Messmate. And I gather what's called Messmate in Vic/Tas is not the same timber that's sold in Qld under that name. I was putting down the variability in the timber more to the fact that one was old-growth, air-dried, and heavily figured and the stuff from Bunnings was KD and plantation grown. I see now that the difference is probably due to the differences in species.

So what species do you think the FB TasOak I have is?



20230102_172548.jpg














































In the pic above, the two laminated boards are noticeably different with one a lot darker and with gum veins. In your opinion, would they be different species? And what should I look for if I want to pick the MA or Messmate from the Bunnies pile? Darker, tighter grain, gum veins, etc?

Good morning Mike. I think the right hand part of the drawer side will be Messmate (gum veining and browner colouring) but wait for confirmation from Graeme.

Good Morning Mike

I also wish that I had more skill at more reliably identifying more species of timber more reliably. There are many Forumites with much higher skills who, I hope, will correct or add to what I say.

I will try and answer your questions.

Originally Posted by KahoyKutter

... Thanks for your reply, Graeme. I was aware that "Tas Oak" is a marketing term encompassing several species but I assumed that the reason it has become widely accepted is because the species that are categorised as Tas Oak all have very similar appearances and properties. I gather from your post that was a wrong assumption on my part. I wish I had the skill of determining the particular species from sight. Judging by the table you have provided, my preference would be for Mountain Ash or Messmate. And I gather what's called Messmate in Vic/Tas is not the same timber that's sold in Qld under that name. I was putting down the variability in the timber more to the fact that one was old-growth, air-dried, and heavily figured and the stuff from Bunnings was KD and plantation grown. I see now that the difference is probably due to the differences in species. ...

Possibly broadly similar appearance and properties might be a better choice of words. My understanding is that back in the colonial era homesick woodworkers thought that some eucalypts had broadly similar properties and appearances to English oak and ash - they must have been very homesick, or poor memories! Hence the two omnibus terms were created. But even within one species, and different parts of the same tree, there can be quite a lot of variation in density, hardness, other properties, and especially colour. That helps make timber so interesting.

If you look at a single growth ring in any bit of timber then you will see two distinct colourings - a broad band of light colour from the flush growing season called springwood or earlywood, and a much narrower darker coloured band from the off-season called summerwood or latewood. In old growth trees these growth rings tend to be fairly narrow, in natural regroth timber after selective logging, the reduced competition makes these growth rings a little wider while in rapidly grown plantation timbers the growth rings are much wider.

Now, if we look at the timber you have cut the dovetail sockets, the growth rings are quite wide indicating rapid growth in a plantation. Very little sawn timber is yet being sourced from plantation eucalypts apart from E nitens ("plantation oak") and E globulus (Tasmanian or southern blue gum). You could have either, but blue gum often has a tell tale bluish/green hue which I cannot see, so I favour the former.

Nitens 2.jpg Photo: KahoyKutter


The summerwood in messmate often has a redish hue to it - I think maroon but not everyone agrees with my colour sense - plus a marginally darker straw colour in the springwood and a slightly wilder grain pattern. That's what I select out, and I am probably 80% accurate.

... So what species do you think the FB TasOak I have is? ...

Nitens 3.jpg

That is a really nice piece of fiddleback and I am pretty sure that it is one of the ashes, probably alpine ash, but I cannot be certain - could be mountain ash.

Nitens 4.jpg

In the pic above, the two laminated boards are noticeably different with one a lot darker and with gum veins. In your opinion, would they be different species? And what should I look for if I want to pick the MA or Messmate from the Bunnies pile? Darker, tighter grain, gum veins, etc? ...

Originally Posted by Mountain Ash

Good morning Mike. I think the right hand part of the drawer side will be Messmate (gum veining and browner colouring) but wait for confirmation from Graeme.

MA could well be right, but both the ashes also have gum veining. I tend to think the right hand one is mountain ash because of the prominent growth rings, deep straw colour and straight grain. The difference in colour of the left hand timber could, in part, be due to less UV darkening as well as normal variation within a species. I think it is one of the ashes, but it could be one of the "other 70 species" in the mixture.

Graeme, thank you your considered reply. From here on in, if I ever do something similar, I'll try and laminate boards from the same plank of wood, or at least from what I reckon are of the same species. Careful selection of material is obviously something I have to improve on. It has bitten on the bum me at least thrice on this build alone. Cheers.

Originally Posted by KahoyKutter

... It has bitten on the bum me at least thrice on this build alone. Cheers.

Only three times - you are doing well.

..........three that I'm willing to admit to

So.......I've cockereled up again !!!


Things were going so well.....

20230116_114235.jpg















































....my joinery had improved and I was relieved to see that the gouges and divots in the rear wall I mentioned in my previous update did not result in visible gaps after the joints had been cleaned up. All of the corners turned out great but the one above is probably the best out of the lot.



20230116_132125.jpg




















































Here's another corner showing the "before"......


20230116_132609.jpg















































.....and the "after". I've tweaked my process/technique since the bottom row of drawers. Initially I had the dovetails recessed into the pin board by about a millimetre. My reasoning for this was so that I didn't have to plane the whole side of the drawer to flush the joints. I know this is not the way to do it if you want to achieve a "piston" fit, but that was never going to be achievable anyway as there are too many gaps in the carcase for the air to escape. This time around I made the sides level with the pin board or a touch proud of it. I did this for 2 reasons. Firstly, for efficiency: I wouldn't need to attach clamping pads to the tails during glue up. Secondly, by minimising the amount of material from the pin board when planing the joints flush, I hoped to avoid exposing the gaps caused by the gouges and divots I mentioned earlier. Evidently this is was the right decision based on my results thus far.



20230116_133457.jpg



















































One final step I do before sanding is to wick some thin CA glue into the seams to "set" any wood fibres that may have broken during planing and "bridged" any gaps. I don't know if this is necessary, and I haven't heard of anyone else who does it, but I figured it can't hurt.


20230116_100456.jpg















































At this stage I was flying. Planing the sides was so much easier when one doesn't have to improvise methods to hold the drawers (nothing like a dash of shavings in your morning cuppa!!)


20230116_163518.jpg

















































I cleaned up the tops and bottoms with my #5 1/2 taking my time to continually check for fitment so I don't take too much off.



20230116_172256.jpg











































At first I thought I'd stuffed by making the leg vise too wide and not allowing clearance for the drawers....


20230116_172521.jpg
















































....but it turned out I did account for it with 5mm to spare !!! It's been so long since I planned the bench that I truly don't know that I had taken this into account. The left and middle drawers fitted in quite easily and I was feeling mighty chuffed with myself. Then came the right hand drawer......


20230116_172217.jpg



















































From this angle it doesn't look too bad. What it doesn't really show is that the left hand side of the drawer sticks out by about 5mm when the right side of the drawer is flush with the bench. In other words, the bloody drawer is a parallelogram instead of a rectangle !!!!



TBC.....

With the finish line in site, I've been trying to keep my momentum going by powering on. In my haste, and probably exacerbated by a touch of complacency and fatigue (i.e. midnight glue up), I must not have checked for square when I glued the bloody drawer. Normally I do.....


20230105_193845 (1).jpg












































.....and I'll use a clamp on the diagonal to pull the drawer square as shown above.


This stuff up will probably set me back 5 days two of which was spent kicking myself. I was so mad that I didn't do any work on the bench for 2 days. I briefly considered leaving it as it was (it is only a workbench after all), but deep down I knew I wouldn't be able to live it. It would irritate me every time I looked at it or grabbed anything from that particular drawer. Besides, one of my primary reason for building my ultimate workbench is to push myself and learn new skills and one of those skills will be how to recover from such a stuff up. So, off to Bunnies to grab another length of Tassie Oak and 6mm ply for the drawer bottom.


20230119_170147.jpg












































20230119_171103.jpg










































This was painful to do, but I used the table saw to separate the drawer faces. Hopefully I can re-use them. I trimmed them some more using the table saw before flattening the backs with my Jack plane.



20230120_102143.jpg













































Because I'm re-using the drawer faces, I make the decision to widen and lengthen the tails so that the mortices fall on endgrain and not the long grain from the previous dovetails. The problem with this the pins need to be smaller making them "London" pins. It also means I can't use the table saw to cut the tails as the angled kerf of the saw blade is too wide for such narrow pins. IIRC, I attempted London pins when I built my Rosewood desks but the results weren't great so I've purposefully avoided using them. The houndstooth Condor tails on the endcaps of the bench don't really count because they're still quite large and won't be delicate/fragile such as these ones will be. So....unable to use the table saw to cut the tails, I pull out my Dozuki. Above is the result. Not pretty at all !!!! Hopefully I can "finesse" them after glue up.



20230120_194010.jpg













































And here's what the London pins looks like. They look so fragile. I was afraid they were going to break off when I did the initial dry fit. Thankfully they didn't but I'm going to limit the amount of dry assembly if possible.


That's all for now. Hopefully the next update will be the drawer completed and fitted.

Originally Posted by KahoyKutter

... So.......I've cockereled up again !!!

Things were going so well.....

Sit down.

Take a slow, deep breath.

Google the Japanese concept of "wabi sabi".

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

Sit down.

Take a slow, deep breath.

That's pretty much what I did for the 2 days...

20230121_163133.jpg












































20230121_163046.jpg














































The drawer is done. I don't know if there's a term for it, but I used a couple of sharpened strips to check the diagonal instead of a square......

20230122_110257.jpg



















































20230122_110557.jpg



















































....and it worked. The drawer came out of the clamps a lot squarer.


20230121_155130.jpg












































During the final dry fit one the tip of one of the London pins on corner A broke off. I couldn't find the piece so I just fashioned a sliver and jammed it into place. Note: the hairline cracks in the FB Tas Oak existed prior to glue up and was a result of when the board was air-dried not due to the dovetails being too tight and breaking the pin board.


20230121_220702.jpg 20230122_090558.jpg
















Above is the before and after of corner A. The pencil points to the pin that had the broken pin.


20230122_090608.jpg











































Here's an extreme close up of the pin in question. The repair is the pointy tip of the pin and not the dark corner which is just natural variance in the wood. The repair is pretty much invisible IMHO.


Marking out the London pins proved to be very difficult due to how small the gap between the dovetails were. I couldn't even get a marking knife into the space. As a result there were more gaps then usual (at least that's my excuse). I wasn't expecting the results to look great and I was pleasantly surprised how they turned out. Don't get me wrong, they're pretty rough and won't win any prizes, but I'm continually amazed by how many gaps are bridged upon glue up/clamping and subsequent flushing of the joints with a hand plane. Below are before and after shots of the other 3 corners to illustrate what I mean.


20230121_220727.jpg20230122_090632.jpg

















Corner B


20230121_220807.jpg20230122_091302.jpg
















Corner C


20230122_092041.jpg20230121_220755.jpg
















Corner D



20230122_175423.jpg

















































20230122_175450.jpg
















































Lastly, I've fitted 5 out of the six faces for the top row of drawers. The 6th one ended up too thin after flattening the back so I had to laminate another piece to get the thickness I need. That's it in the clamps in the last pic.


That's all for now.



Cheers,
Mike

Thanks again for the updates. Love the figure on the drawer fronts.