Sash bar dimensions for historical windows

[steve355]

Clearance gaps? You've got to able to fit the thing in the hole.

Nah I’ll just bang it it with a hammer and chop bits off if need be. That’s how my previous builder did it.

Seriously, I probably won’t install it as the hole it’s sized to fit already has a functional window in it. I just want to learn the process. The one I need to eventually replace is the square bay in the pic below.

Plus my wife wants a greenhouse.

 

[mouldy plane]

Hi

I am doing some research to discover the dimensions of historical sash window bars. I thought perhaps there might be an old joiner about who has repaired original windows and knows. In particular, I wondered if there was a standard size for the glazing rebate.

I have scoured all the old texts, Ellis, Hasluck etc and none of them really seem to say.

The dimensions I’m looking for are A, B and C below.View attachment 164801
In general I know A+B+C. It’s given by the size of the moulding plane or template.
I have read that A and B are typically equal. For example, I have a 1 1/2“ sash template, where moulding A can be measured to be 1/2”. If square section B is equal (1/2”) it leaves 1/2” for C - the glazing rebate… perfect. But I doubt that A and B are always equal. And C is unlikely to always be 1/3 the sash depth. But C may always be 1/2”, as glass doesn’t differ much in thickness.

Looking at the Mathieson catalogue from 1900ish, they have sash planes for many sizes of bars available:


View attachment 164804
Here they show a 2 1/4” glazing bar, probably for a shop front. I can’t believe that the glazing rebate is 2/3“! There must be a standard, which may have been lost in the mists of time.

If anyone knows the answer or where to find out, that would be really helpful. (Hint - the answer is not in mm!)

Steve

 

[Jacob]

Just had a flip through a few books to see what they say about rods.
Plenty of excellent detail in Ellis, and in Greenhalgh, Corkhill, Lowsley.
Just a paragraph in Ernest Joyce but he's more furniture than architectural joinery.
Two pages in Ernest Scott
But all in agreement, expanding along the same lines, much as above in this thread, with a few variations.
These are all essential reading IMHO. Hardcore woodwork for the trade with plenty of excellent hand tool stuff as well as machines, though Scott a little more for top end DIY - he was a highly experienced cabinet maker but writing at the time DIY woodwork was really taking off.
Story "rods" for staircases get mentioned but not story "sticks" as such. They seem to be an amateur thing.
Nothing in Stillman, Eastwick-Field, but that's written for architects not woodworkers. Lots of interesting info though.
Nothing in Robert Wearing and a quick browse suggests nothing in any later books, which seem all to be written for the DIY trade.
I don't remember reading anything in any of the mags either, but there must be something somewhere!

 

[mouldy plane]

Hi

I am doing some research to discover the dimensions of historical sash window bars. I thought perhaps there might be an old joiner about who has repaired original windows and knows. In particular, I wondered if there was a standard size for the glazing rebate.

I have scoured all the old texts, Ellis, Hasluck etc and none of them really seem to say.

The dimensions I’m looking for are A, B and C below.View attachment 164801
In general I know A+B+C. It’s given by the size of the moulding plane or template.
I have read that A and B are typically equal. For example, I have a 1 1/2“ sash template, where moulding A can be measured to be 1/2”. If square section B is equal (1/2”) it leaves 1/2” for C - the glazing rebate… perfect. But I doubt that A and B are always equal. And C is unlikely to always be 1/3 the sash depth. But C may always be 1/2”, as glass doesn’t differ much in thickness.

Looking at the Mathieson catalogue from 1900ish, they have sash planes for many sizes of bars available:


View attachment 164804
Here they show a 2 1/4” glazing bar, probably for a shop front. I can’t believe that the glazing rebate is 2/3“! There must be a standard, which may have been lost in the mists of time.

If anyone knows the answer or where to find out, that would be really helpful. (Hint - the answer is not in mm!)

Steve

Hi Steve. This an interesting post that Andytoolsandtat made me aware of. The whole subject can get very confusing unless you have been working in the joinery trade for a number of years, and served an apprenticeship. The measurements A,B, and C, are defined purely on the moulding plane, or spindle cutter you have, the size of your mortice chisel, and the type of glazing you intend to use. on top of this you have to think about the maximum size of sash width you can fit into the casement frame, or sash box. I am currently making some vertical sliding sashes. I need to keep the boxes as narrow as possible as I am limited by internal shutters, and the depth of reveal I have on the external masonry. This means my sash material can only be 1 3/4" full. into this I have to fit 14mm conservation units, and a 1/2" ovolo mould. this dictates me to having a dimension of 1/2" for a, 3/8" for my mortice, and just under an inch for my rebate. None of these measurements could be considered "traditional", there just what I have to use to meet the constraints of the job, and I am sure this is what happened to other joiners in the past. I feel that at some point I would like to perhaps run an open day at my workshop for anyone who may need help on the subject of sash window construction. This would be free to anyone with a genuine need, or interest in learning about this fascinating subject at the bench so to speak. Cheers, Richard

 

[HOJ]

Quick observe @steve355 , where you have drawn the frame's jamb lines on your "plan", I don't think are appropriate, the book you are reading in my view isn't relevant to you, just read it and understand some of the principals, don't take it literally, your casements will be 1 1/2 thick I presume, so your jambs only need to be 2 1/2 deep, landing at the cill's 1st rebated step point not in front of it, I would ditch the external chamfer on them and the head, save some wood and complications when it comes to making the joints.

 

[Sgian Dubh]

I don't remember reading anything in any of the mags either, but there must be something somewhere!

There is at least one I know of. 2004, February and March, Every rod tells a story, parts 1 and 2, Furniture & Cabinetmaking, Issues 85 and 86. Below is a scan of the first page of the article.

That was almost the last one I had published in a journal/magazine because by that point I'd got kind of fed-up writing for measly recompense, just one irritation amongst others. After about 2004/5 my writing efforts turned to longer form publishing. Slainte.

​

 

[johnnyb]

Hi Steve. This an interesting post that Andytoolsandtat made me aware of. The whole subject can get very confusing unless you have been working in the joinery trade for a number of years, and served an apprenticeship. The measurements A,B, and C, are defined purely on the moulding plane, or spindle cutter you have, the size of your mortice chisel, and the type of glazing you intend to use. on top of this you have to think about the maximum size of sash width you can fit into the casement frame, or sash box. I am currently making some vertical sliding sashes. I need to keep the boxes as narrow as possible as I am limited by internal shutters, and the depth of reveal I have on the external masonry. This means my sash material can only be 1 3/4" full. into this I have to fit 14mm conservation units, and a 1/2" ovolo mould. this dictates me to having a dimension of 1/2" for a, 3/8" for my mortice, and just under an inch for my rebate. None of these measurements could be considered "traditional", there just what I have to use to meet the constraints of the job, and I am sure this is what happened to other joiners in the past. I feel that at some point I would like to perhaps run an open day at my workshop for anyone who may need help on the subject of sash window construction. This would be free to anyone with a genuine need, or interest in learning about this fascinating subject at the bench so to speak. Cheers, Richard

I would love to attend that Richard. and I for one would be happy to make a charity donation.

 

[steve355]

Quick observe @steve355 , where you have drawn the frame's jamb lines on your "plan", I don't think are appropriate, the book you are reading in my view isn't relevant to you, just read it and understand some of the principals, don't take it literally, your casements will be 1 1/2 thick I presume, so your jambs only need to be 2 1/2 deep, landing at the cill's 1st rebated step point not in front of it, I would ditch the external chamfer on them and the head, save some wood and complications when it comes to making the joints.

You are right. The whole topic of the dimensions of the frame is something I don’t really understand. The book actually recommended 4x3 1/2 or something like that, I didn’t want to spend the money on the wood, since it’s just a learning exercise, so I think I halved the thickness of the jambs and left the other dimensions the same. When I make it for real, for the big bay window I was going to use approximately the 4x4 shown in Cassell‘s carpentry.

But for the much smaller “prototype” window I’m doing, that wouldn’t work, far too chunky, take up too much light If I installed it.

There must be a rule of thumb for frame dimensions for different sized windows but I’ve no idea what it is.

 

[Jacob]

.....

There must be a rule of thumb for frame dimensions for different sized windows but I’ve no idea what it is.

There isn't one.
You showed some nice looking windows in you photo - check the sizes perhaps?
First rule of good design - copy, copy, copy.

 

[steve355]

There isn't one.
You showed some nice looking windows in you photo - check the sizes perhaps?
First rule of good design - copy, copy, copy.

The casement windows that were made for my house are nice enough but look too modern for my liking, despite me trying to get them to use a traditional design. The jambs and mullions are too skinny, the bars too chunky, the mouldings are unrefined. They look like they were made by machine, because they were,

The sash windows they did are better.

But that’s the reason for trying to make windows traditionally with traditional dimensions and traditional tools really. Most modern stuff just doesn’t look right.

 

[cowtown_eric]

variation available at

https://canada.desertcart.com/produ...-stairs-risers-partitions-shelf-scribe-layout

 

[Doug71]

I am sure all of the joiners posting on this thread could make you a window using machinery in the style that you want, it's pretty standard for anyone who does traditional joinery, the problem is once you need to comply with building regs it's a whole different story. To comply with regs you are talking probably min 22mm thick double glazed units with probably a 15mm sight line which gives the window a whole different look to one with 3mm thick glass and 5mms sightlines.

 

[Adam W.]

Rod is two dimensional and one of many pattern or layout systems widely used in many crafts and industries, from early days.
Story stick/rod is one dimensional and is a collection of measurements, the name derived from "storey" with or without the "e" referring to a floor/floor height and hence commonly used for stair risings layouts. As @Adam W. explained before he went off in a huff - nothing to do with Jackanory or Watch with Mother!
They get confused but they do overlap!


Hard work though innit!

I didn't go off in a virtual huff, I just thought I had said enough and we were getting bogged down......But apparently the storm still rages.

Carry on.

 

[Jacob]

I didn't go off in a virtual huff, I just thought I had said enough and we were getting bogged down......But apparently the storm still rages.

Carry on.

What storm?
Just an interesting chat about woodwork.

 

[Jacob]

I am sure all of the joiners posting on this thread could make you a window using machinery in the style that you want, it's pretty standard for anyone who does traditional joinery, the problem is once you need to comply with building regs it's a whole different story. To comply with regs you are talking probably min 22mm thick double glazed units with probably a 15mm sight line which gives the window a whole different look to one with 3mm thick glass and 5mms sightlines.

If you do the calcs the cost of heat saved by modern regulation standards is not that much. Not cost effective compared to other ways of saving energy. Particularly if you factor in obsolescence.
It's all a bit of a cock up!
Higher prices make it more cost effective of course, but only in the same proportion as it affects other heat saving measures, which tend to be much better value, starting with draught exclusion, heat source efficiency, insulation, wearing thicker underwear...etc

 

[steve355]

Here we go, a second use for my MDF shelf, joiner’s rod AND engineering flat surface for jointing my jointer plane, which had developed a significant bow. Already paid for itself. Every workshop needs a Wickes MDF shelf. Essential tool.

 

[Adam W.]

And if you are still not sure it's all in Ellis!
I hadn't read it closely to be honest but it's pretty much as I was taught; I was beginning to wonder!

I've made enough windows entirely by hand, including vertically sliding sash bay windows to have it figured out. And I have read Ellis several times and used his drawings of bay windows to mark up the rod that I used to set mine out with.

I've never had use for the convoluted MDF shelving method and all the extra work involved in making several copies of the same stuff though, but if you feel the need to do it that way, that's fine by me.

 

[Jacob]

I've made enough windows entirely by hand, including vertically sliding sash bay windows to have it figured out. And I have read Ellis several times and used his drawings of bay windows to mark up the rod that I used to set mine out with.

I've never had use for the convoluted MDF shelving method and all the extra work involved in making several copies of the same stuff though, but if you feel the need to do it that way, that's fine by me.

You still haven't got it have you?
It's much less work using the rod, not least because it reduces error. It's the final full sized working drawing which verifies that everything fits. Just happens to be useful to have it on a board in the workshop. No need to transfer measurements with a tape with associated errors, still less to do any little calculations, it's all been done and you just drop the work on to the rod.
Once you have it sorted you are on auto pilot.
No "several copies" involved. You could make 100 identical sash windows from the one single rod.
The same applies to all the other crafts and industries who work from full size patterns one way or another.
MDF is just more convenient and cheaper than having to plane up a real wood board. The books go on about having to paint them with whiting etc.

 

[Adam W.]

Oh dear, this is why I dropped out of the thread.

You don't read what other people write and you seem to think that you are the only one who can make stuff.

 

[Jacob]

Oh dear, this is why I dropped out of the thread.

You don't read what other people write and you seem to think that you are the only one who can make stuff.

Me and the many thousands (millions?) who were taught to do it in much the same way, established practice, as described in detail in all the best books.
But carry in doing it your way, don't worry about it.