Hand cut dovetails in sapele

[custard]

While we're talking about dovetails there's a twist regarding the dovetails you use at the back of the drawer. I'm conscious this all gets a bit "angels dancing on the head of the pin", so if you're more of a pragmatic furniture maker then you should probably skip this post!

Here's the issue. On a traditional English drawer, built with drawer slips, the bottom pin at the back has to have it's lower edge flat rather than angled in order to allow the drawer bottom to slide in. So the question then is, do you have the top pin as the mirror image in order to balance it out (that's what I do), or do you stick to the normal shape?

Here's a photo showing a typical back on one of my drawers,

Personally I've never given this a great deal of thought, especially as it's unlikely to be ever seen by a client, I prefer the symmetry so that's the way I cut my dovetails at the back.

However once I was exhibiting some of my furniture, and during the course of the show two fairly eminent makers wandered up and pulled out a drawer. The first tapped the "balanced" dovetail layout and gave a silently approving thumbs up. The second angrily jabbed at it and muttered that it was self indulgent and unnecessary.

I guess you can't please all the people all the time!

 

[woodbrains]

While we're talking about dovetails there's a twist regarding the dovetails you use at the back of the drawer. I'm conscious this all gets a bit "angels dancing on the head of the pin", so if you're more of a pragmatic furniture maker then you should probably skip this post!

Here's the issue. On a traditional English drawer, built with drawer slips, the bottom pin at the back has to have it's lower edge flat rather than angled in order to allow the drawer bottom to slide in. So the question then is, do you have the top pin as the mirror image in order to balance it out (that's what I do), or do you stick to the normal shape?

Here's a photo showing a typical back on one of my drawers,



Personally I've never given this a great deal of thought, especially as it's unlikely to be ever seen by a client, I prefer the symmetry so that's the way I cut my dovetails at the back.

However once I was exhibiting some of my furniture, and during the course of the show two fairly eminent makers wandered up and pulled out a drawer. The first tapped the "balanced" dovetail layout and gave a silently approving thumbs up. The second angrily jabbed at it and muttered that it was self indulgent and unnecessary.

I guess you can't please all the people all the time!

Hello,

It wouldn't take any extra work to make the top tail match the bottom one, not a bit, so how could it be self indulgent? Surely it is noticing the details that makes for fine work. I think the craftsman that was irked by the detail was actually secretly annoyed that he hadn't done it himself!

Mike.

 

[Jacob]

While we're talking about dovetails there's a twist regarding the dovetails you use at the back of the drawer. I'm conscious this all gets a bit "angels dancing on the head of the pin", so if you're more of a pragmatic furniture maker then you should probably skip this post!

Here's the issue. On a traditional English drawer, built with drawer slips, the bottom pin at the back has to have it's lower edge flat rather than angled in order to allow the drawer bottom to slide in. So the question then is, do you have the top pin as the mirror image in order to balance it out (that's what I do), or do you stick to the normal shape?

Here's a photo showing a typical back on one of my drawers,



Personally I've never given this a great deal of thought, especially as it's unlikely to be ever seen by a client, I prefer the symmetry so that's the way I cut my dovetails at the back.

However once I was exhibiting some of my furniture, and during the course of the show two fairly eminent makers wandered up and pulled out a drawer. The first tapped the "balanced" dovetail layout and gave a silently approving thumbs up. The second angrily jabbed at it and muttered that it was self indulgent and unnecessary.

I guess you can't please all the people all the time!

Backs of (trad) drawers are thinner than yours - which means the DT pins have to be fatter to give them enough strength.
Custard I see you are following the strictly modern and completely redundant fashion of having a slot + screw! You don't need anything with a thick bottom like that and anyway that screw detail doesn't work. I think it was invented by Wearing. You will never ever find it on old work.
Thin bottoms sometimes pinned and shrinkage takes place in and out of the front slot, which isn't good.

 

[woodbrains]

Backs of (trad) drawers are thinner than yours - which means the DT pins have to be fatter to give them enough strength.
Custard I see you are following the strictly modern and completely redundant fashion of having a slot + screw! You don't need anything with a thick bottom like that and anyway that screw detail doesn't work. I think it was invented by Wearing. You will never ever find it on old work.
Thin bottoms sometimes pinned and shrinkage takes place in and out of the front slot, which isn't good.

Hello,

You were warned to skip that post if you didn't like the content!

I don't want to write out of turn, it is Custard's post, after all but, I think you'll find that drawers is a relatively small one. I would guess the back is no more that 5/16 in thick which is no thicker than traditional drawers of that size.

If it is not, in your opinion, good to pin the drawer bottom to the back and let seasonal movement take place in the front, but you don't like the idea of a slot and screw, then what exactly do we do? On one hand you say the trad way is the best way, then go and pick a fault with it, when it suits, but not allow a modern approach to answer the problem. If there are no trad examples which work in this case, how can doing something non traditional be faulted? It is about time that you realised that doing things the old way isn't always efficacious. There are lots of antiques with split case sides and table tops because no allowance was made for central heating. Do we change the way we work, or stick to the traditional and hope.

Mike.

 

[monkeybiter]

Surely 'trad' is only important if you're restoring?
If it's new then don't you just want 'best'?

 

[MusicMan]

On the Georgian bureau that I restored recently (see separate thread) the drawers were pretty big and the bases about 1/2 - 5/8" thick (chamfered at the edges to 1/4" so the slots were narrower), with grain running left to right. The backs of the drawers were indeed thoroughly nailed in, with quite substantial wrought-iron square nails. And yes, the shrinkage had left a gap at the front of some of the drawers. I couldn't remove the nails (into oak, so really locked in) without wrecking the base. So I put up with the gaps, except on the very deep lowest drawer which would be expected to take a lot of weight, and also had the biggest gap. I did a rather complicated infill of the empty slot. I glued up two pieces the thickness of the drawer edge, overlapping them. The upper part could be manoeuvred into the slot and the piece underneath was glued to the underside of the drawer. A wedge arrangement during glueing (see pic) pulled the insert just a little out of the slot and pressed it against the edge of the board, thus still leaving a little space for expansion if humidity increased in the future.

I am sure Custard's furniture will be a candidate for restoration a few hundred years from now, and a simple non-corroding screw to retain the drawer base will make the restorer's life a lot easier!

Keith

 

[Jacob]

On the Georgian bureau that I restored recently (see separate thread) the drawers were pretty big and the bases about 1/2 - 5/8" thick (chamfered at the edges to 1/4" so the slots were narrower), with grain running left to right. The backs of the drawers were indeed thoroughly nailed in, with quite substantial wrought-iron square nails.

This fairly common but I've got a feeling that it was done later; at some point in the drawers life and enthusiastic amateur woodworker noticed the absence of any fixings and decided it was time to use his new hammer! Perhaps when the base had come adrift and was in need of fixing.
I've pulled out nails in similar situations and pushed the base back into the front slot with a dab of glue to keep it there. By way of confirmation I've also seen plenty of examples of good quality furniture done that way from new (no nails, nothing). A base 1/2 to 5/8" thick doesn't need holding up at the back it's plenty stiff enough for normal use.
The single screw (Wearing's, or perhaps Barnsley - they were always trying to improve things , not necessarily successfully) is doomed to fail - any load on the base and the tiny bearing surface of screw against wood would press in and jam tight - any movement in the base would be more likely to cause a split rather than allow a smooth movement of any sort - though I haven't actually seen this I'm just guessing - the screw in a slot is not at all common - just recent work done under the influence of Wearing (or some other hack woodwork journalist!)

Surely 'trad' is only important if you're restoring?
If it's new then don't you just want 'best'?

If you are using hand tools then trad is usually best. There was a huge industry making stuff very efficiently by hand - everything from huge ships, coaches, boats, buildings, millions of other artifacts; they really knew what they were doing.

........ but not allow a modern approach to answer the problem. .....

What problem? A lot of modern woodworking seems to involve solutions to non existent problems. :lol:

 

[B3nder]

I'm looking for a functional joint that isn't too gappy
I'd love to have a joint that also looks great, but firth ando
Foremost I'm looking for function.

So I tired another set yesterday instead of sawing out the waste
I chiseled it out. Also really slowed down. End result being fit
From saw, more importantly no splitting . Although gappy.

Progress being made and getting better.

Once I can't drive a bus through the gap on a couple of the gaps I'll
Post pics of my first once and latest one.

 

[MusicMan]

Jacob, you may be right that it was done later, but it certainly doesn't look like it to me in this instance. The boards are very wide (110 cm) and do definitely sag under "drawer load" if not supported. The nails are identical to the ones used in other structural places such as the drawer runners and fixing the back, and are of the square "rose" head, tapered pyramid type that went out of fashion in around 1800 when cut nails were introduced. They are also very neatly done, quite precise nailing in fact. Bear in mind that this was a country piece not a fashionable metro bureau.

I'd have loved to repair as you suggest, but with iron in oak after over 200 years (and damp at some point) they really were locked in by rust. I could get the nailed back off, but that was a straight push (with heavy hammer and wooden drift); a straight push on the drawer base would of course split the wood at the grooves.

 

[Jacob]

Jacob, you may be right that it was done later, but it certainly doesn't look like it to me in this instance. The boards are very wide (110 cm) and do definitely sag under "drawer load" if not supported. The nails are identical to the ones used in other structural places such as the drawer runners and fixing the back, and are of the square "rose" head, tapered pyramid type that went out of fashion in around 1800 when cut nails were introduced. They are also very neatly done, quite precise nailing in fact. Bear in mind that this was a country piece not a fashionable metro bureau.

I'd have loved to repair as you suggest, but with iron in oak after over 200 years (and damp at some point) they really were locked in by rust. I could get the nailed back off, but that was a straight push (with heavy hammer and wooden drift); a straight push on the drawer base would of course split the wood at the grooves.

I'm sure you are right if the drawers are that wide. They wouldn't have anticipated modern dry conditions to shrink the bottom out of the front slot.
A better class of work would have a muntin dividing the bottom into two pieces, needing less support.

 

[MusicMan]

Agreed re the muntin, but not sure they had come in by 1755, at least out in the provinces. They had only just started putting the drawer grain left to right rather than front to back. And for sure no central heating to worry about.

The shrinkage was enormous. The sides had shrunk so much that the drawers stuck out at the front. I had to remove the back and remount it about 1 cm further out!

I guess one could say that the wood wasn't seasoned enough, but our woodworking experience normally lasts a few decades rather than 250 years. I don't think that our accepted norms actually work over this time scale. For example, my bureau was stored in a shed, not damp but essentially at the local outdoor humidity, for 20 years. And I suspect it was in a shed for a while before, judging by the damp damage and rot at the base. Conventional wisdom would say that it would humidify and move back to its original air-dried thickness. But it didn't. After some period, gradual shrinkage may become irreversible. There's research to do in this field.

 

[custard]

Agreed re the muntin, but not sure they had come in by 1755, at least out in the provinces. They had only just started putting the drawer grain left to right rather than front to back.

You're absolutely right, and it was this switch, from having the grain on drawer bottoms running front to back, to having it running side to side, that completely changed the method of drawer construction. The classical English method of drawer construction, that I follow today, had been fully worked out on high end furniture in all its mechanical details by about 1800. I suspect, but don't know this for a fact, that it was actually developed forty or fifty years earlier on continental furniture.

Regarding muntins, the general convention today is to include muntins on drawers wider than about 24". Personally I think they look so good that I'll sometimes include them on drawers from about 18" or 20" wide. Another little design detail is that once I get up to drawers that are about 28" wide I'll often use a double muntin, but rather than have the three sections of drawer bottom at equal width I'll make the central section slightly wider and the two outside sections slightly narrower. I think that looks very pleasing.

Another little design courtesy is to ensure that where you have two or more drawers side by side, then the grain on the drawer bottoms runs in an unbroken line right across all the drawers. It'll hardly ever be seen once the drawers are filled, but top end furniture making is all about incorporating beautiful little details that will surprise and delight even if it takes many years for them to be discovered.

On the subject of little details, here's an Oak muntin that I made,

I'd previously been unhappy with the bead that I normally run on the edges of drawer slips and muntins, in that the quirk was so narrow that if I wiped away any glue squeeze out with a damp cloth the quirk might close up and become less visible. So I asked Phil of Philly Planes to make me a moulding plane with a slightly fatter quirk to compensate, which you can see in this photo.

Here's this later muntin shown against the type of muntin that I used to make,

You can also see in this photo what I mean by having an unbroken grain progression on the drawer bottom, but where there are multiple drawers side by side I follow this harmonious detail right across all the drawers.

 

[MusicMan]

Custard

Thanks for the post - I love all those design details that you incorporate.

Keith

 

[Jacob]

...... The classical English method of drawer construction, that I follow today, had been fully worked out on high end furniture in all its mechanical details by about 1800. I suspect, but don't know this for a fact, that it was actually developed forty or fifty years earlier on continental furniture.

Sounds very likely to me - except for the screw in the slot which I think is a very modern and rather clumsy afterthought.
NB low end furniture was done much the same but with less care, more speed, less finishing. Only very small or very cheap drawers would have slots in the sides instead of slips.

 

[Trafalgar]

If you do decide to put a screw in the slot of a drawer bottom then the bottom should be no thicker than the length of the un-threaded portion of the screw under the head. Use a round head solid brass screw and washer, and don't snug it up too tight. Drill a pilot hole. If the bottom does start moving and ends up engaging the threaded portion of the screw then the technique stands a good chance of being no longer useful for its intended purpose. Wax the washer and the unthreaded shank of the screw. You can leave the washer off if you wish. The drawer bottom must have something smooth to move against -- the unthreaded shank, and not against the screw's threads. If the slot is substantially wider than the screw's shank, then do use the washer, as you'll need it to actually fasten the bottom to the back. The tendency in this instance is to screw the whole thing down too tight, which will make the bottom split when it starts to move, the slot being not effective at all. Never use a screw that's threaded all the way to the head - carpentry screws basically.

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

The other way is to plough a deep groove at the rear of the drawer front. The rear of the drawer bottom is then fixed, and expansion takes place into the front groove. A neater solution, but only possible if the drawer front is thick enough.

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Trafalgar]

The bottom is always inserted into a groove in the front, is it not? Except perhaps for very small drawers. Expansion and contraction take place in the front groove and via the slot in the back. You can't really force a board to move in only one direction. If you fix it hard at the back, socked down tight with no slot or socked down really tight with a slot, it will split eventually. Maybe if it were a rattle-around fit in the front groove this would work, but even then I tend to doubt it.

This is why it is always advised to be careful gluing up a door with a floating panel -- even a little squeeze out can lock it in on one side and cause a split later.

One occasionally hears of putting a dab of glue in the middle of a panel and slot arrangement, middle of a breadboard run, etc., under the assumption the panel can still expand and contract fully in its width (or length depending on grain orientation). Well, it will move and when it does that little spot of glue will give way - probably in the first full cycle of the seasons. It's a waste of time.

 

[Jacob]

The bottom is always inserted into a groove in the front, is it not? Except perhaps for very small drawers. Expansion and contraction take place in the front groove and via the slot in the back.

Unless you glue it into the front slot - then it'll move at the unscrewed un nailed back edge.

You can't really force a board to move in only one direction.

You can - if you fix one edge then the other will move

.....
This is why it is always advised to be careful gluing up a door with a floating panel -- even a little squeeze out can lock it in on one side and cause a split later.

There is a handy wheeze here which is to glut it with a dab in the slots just dead centre top and bottom. Then the edges can move freely but equally, without pulling right out of one slot.

 

[katellwood]

My method

When using the slotted screw technique in drawer bottoms and to ensure any movement is at the back of the drawer follow the directions given by cstanford to facilitate movement but secure the drawer bottom to the drawer front with a small glue block on the underside. put it in the centre so as not to interfere with any drawer stops in the opening

This ensures no unsightly gap will appear and is easily removable by cutting the block out without terminal damage should the bottom need to be removed.

 

[Trafalgar]

Jacob, see my revised post -- I don't think the spot of glue will hold. I don't do many repairs, but I've done a few and I've seen the remnants of a spot of glue - hide glue. Maybe this would work with Elmer's white PVA -- something flexible. It won't work with hide glue or anything else that sets up hard and brittle.