OldTools Archive
Recent | Bios | FAQ |
46700 | Paul Pedersen <perrons@c...> | 1998‑07‑23 | Treenails and jowls |
I'm currently designing a timber-framed shed for the side of the house using Cecil A. Hewett's "English Historic Carpentry" (ISBN 0-941936-41-4) as a reference. Off-hand I'd say I'll be needing at least a couple hundred treenails. Is there some trick to producing these in a timely fashion, or does one have to hack them out one at a time using a hatchet ? Hewing each one by hand could easily amount to the most time-consuming operation of the whole construction. The joint connecting post, top plate and tie beam typically relies on a jowled post, where the upper extremity of the post is about twice as deep as the rest (that's the jowl), providing sufficient wood for a pair of tenons, one into the top plate and one into the tie beam. From the pictures it looks like these were originally hewn from a single piece of timber (I'd be interested in learning how). I intend to do most of the construction using 4x4 western red cedar so am wondering if building up the top part of the post using a short piece of 4x4 would be sensible. I'd probably resort to a bunch of screws for this part, even though that would sort of violate the wood-only intent of the whole constuction. BTW, the above-mentioned book provides a good look at some pretty fantastic woodwork, being mostly about cathedrals and such (mainly sketches of the constructions of frames and their joints, very few photos or descriptions of how these frames were covered). What I find really amazing is that the pinnacle of what man has been able to achieve using wood only occured many hundreds of years ago. (I was also heartened to read that some of the roofs took 10-15 years to complete). Paul Pedersen Montreal (Quebec) http://www.cam.org/~perrons/Paul/Woodwork/woodwork.html |
|||
46701 | Aaron Ionta <aaron.ionta@i...> | 1998‑07‑23 | Re: Treenails and jowls |
Paul Pedersen wrote: > > I'm currently designing a timber-framed shed for the side of > the house using Cecil A. Hewett's "English Historic Carpentry" > (ISBN 0-941936-41-4) as a reference. > |
|||
46703 | Daniel Indrigo <daniel.indrigo@s...> | 1998‑07‑23 | Re: Treenails and jowls |
Paul Pedersen wrote: > |
|||
46705 | "Peterson, Samuel L." <PetersonS@m...> | 1998‑07‑23 | RE: Treenails and jowls |
Gentle galoots, Depending on how big the "pegs" were to be, I would have these suggestions: 1) Find a pipe that is somewhat bigger inside than the intended peg. Sharpen the end of the pipe and slightly push the wall of the pipe in at the sharpened edge. Get some straight splitting logs cut into the appropriate length. Mark lines on the end with a froe, to form a series of squares. Tie some string around the log to keep it together during the splitting. Split away! Drive the square blanks through the pipe. As one is almost down to the cutting lip, then place another one on that and pound. Never hit the cutter. This would work for short pegs, as longer ones will get stuck in the pipe. 2)Harvest saplings close to size and use a Stail engine. It has two handles and a cutter. 3)Same as #2, but use a Fork stave plane. >Paul wrote: >Off-hand I'd say I'll be needing at least a couple hundred >treenails. Is there some trick to producing these in a timely >fashion, or does one have to hack them out one at a time using >a hatchet ? Hewing each one by hand could easily amount to >the most time-consuming operation of the whole construction. |
|||
46710 | Paul Pedersen <perrons@c...> | 1998‑07‑23 | RE: Treenails and jowls |
Guess I'm not the only one not getting much done this morning ... :-) I was under the impression that treenails were square in section, and tapered lengthwise. Hewett doesn't say anything about them but there's a picture of one on page 145 of Wolfram Graubner's "Encyclopedia of Wood Joints" (ISBN 1-56158-004-X) which is as just described plus a four-sided pyramid to point the tip. As in furniture, I thought the square sides, driven into a round hole, gave the peg more bite and that the taper was to help insertion into a draw-bored tenon. I don't suppose there's a source for ready-made treenails ? I should have started splitting last winter. Actually, next time I lose power for eleven days during an ice storm, I'll now have something to do while watching the fire :-) Paul Pedersen Montreal (Quebec) http://www.cam.org/~perrons/Paul/Woodwork/woodwork.html |
|||
46717 | Cougarjack@a... | 1998‑07‑23 | Re: Treenails and jowls |
Paul, I've been involved in designing and erecting several large timber frames, and dismantling a few more, and I'll pass along a few things in response to your questions. Jowled posts, or gunstock posts, and they are sometimes called, were ripped from full-width timbers. I'm not sure you could replicate the strength with any other arrangement. I did a mess of these from 8 x 14 oak timbers, 14 feet long. All but the top 3 feet had to be ripped off as waste. After doing a few, it became obvious that there had to be a faster way. What we finally decided on was to crosscut every few inches along the waste, then knock off the resulting blocks with a big mallet, and or a framing chisel. The raw edge was then finished with drawknife, slick, and planes. In green stuff, this is easier than it sounds. I would NOT use metallic fastners in any timber frame construction for the reason that humid air will deposit dew on the metal, and draw it into the wood structure right at all the critical joints, thereby causing it to deteriorate long before its time. The same applies to bolted-on joint braces, nails, throughbolting, and screws. This admixture of two disparate building disciplines is, in my opinion, the cause of the early demise of a lot of this country's covered bridges. I believe the speed of decay is related to the wood species, but it will surely take place in time. An all wood joint will last centuries. Trenails, or pins, are most easily made from very dry stock, ripped in long lengths, and planed from the square to a slightly oversized octagon shape. A simple jig helps with the planing. Make it up in the same fashion as the jig used for planing the segments for bamboo fishing rod blanks. Arrange it so the corner to be planed just sticks up proud of the jig walls, and you'll know you've planed deeply enough when your plane begins to strike the sides of the jig. Use a block plane or a small smoother set fairly coarse. They can be rough cut before driving, and then trimmed, or they can be finished on the endgrain with more detail, then driven. The idea is to get the corners to bite into the wood of the timbers, and then have them swell as they wick moisture from the less-dry timbers. The bore circle of the drill bit you use should just fit into the octagon that describes the pins you're making. This insures the corners will bite when driven. Most of the ones I've extracted from buildings I've torn down were handmade like this from black locust (robinia pseudoacacia) or honeylocust. (gleditsia triacanthos) The stock for these cannot be too dry. For larger structures, it is helpful to bore holes so that they are slightly offcenter from each other. The driving in of the pin or trenail then pulls the joint tight. I've seen this referred to as "drawboring", but the term itself is confusing. The practice itself is useful however, as I've seen the endgrain of the girt or horizontal member actually forced into the side grain of the post by this technique. I'll leave you in the hands of our other timberframers, who I'm certain are lurking somewhere near. Good luck, and DO supply pictures when you're done! Regards, Nick |
|||
46720 | "Bill Clouser" <clouser@f...> | 1998‑07‑23 | RE: Treenails and jowls |
Snip of very complete description of tree nails from Nick: > Trenails, or pins, are most easily made from very dry stock, > ripped in long lengths, and planed from the square to a > slightly oversized octagon shape. > The idea is to get the corners to bite into the wood of the > timbers, and then have them swell as they wick moisture from > the less-dry timbers. > The stock for these cannot be too dry. Reading this makes me wonder if the combination of very dry pegs and wetter surrounding timber will be susceptible to the same effects as the mortise and tenon joints in Windsor chairs. In his early stages, Mike Dunbar used to recommend that the tenon material be very dry so that it would swell to lock the joint together. But later, he said that was a mistake, because he realized that, as it swelled, the super-dry tenon would compress the wood fibers around the mortise which would lead to a looser joint during subsequent wet/dry cycles where the tenon and mortise might shrink away from each other. I believe this is his current thinking anyway. - Bill |
|||
46723 | Steve.Shapland@e... (Steve Shapland) | 1998‑07‑23 | RE: Treenails and jowls |
> Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1998 10:35:58 -0400 > From: Paul Pedersen |
|||
46726 | "Wilson, Richard" <RWilson@C...> | 1998‑07‑23 | RE: Treenails and jowls |
Steve Shapland, replying to Pauls query, says... >I seem to recall Roy Underhill using a dowel plate for producing >pins on one of his shows. He split pieces of approximate size ..snippo.. Which made me recall that whilst enthroned yesterday evening, leafing through one of Harold Underhill's books (doyen of model ships) I read his description of making wooden trenails down to drill size No73. He advocates bamboo, and use of a dowel plate, which he used to make from iron hoops ex barrels. When they lost the crisp corner needed to cut well, you just drill a new one. (I don't think trenails get much smaller than No73.....) Richard Wilson (fascinating books - my hero.... ) on assignment in Swindon, UK Mail to ARWilson@c... always reaches me eventuallly cell phone +44 (0) 468 266052 |
|||
46734 | Carl Muhlhausen <ledzep@a...> | 1998‑07‑23 | Re: Treenails and jowls |
Bill Clouser wrote: > > Snip of very complete description of tree nails from Nick: > > > Trenails, or pins, are most easily made from very dry stock, > > ripped in long lengths, and planed from the square to a > > slightly oversized octagon shape. > > > The idea is to get the corners to bite into the wood of the > > timbers, and then have them swell as they wick moisture from > > the less-dry timbers. > > > The stock for these cannot be too dry. > > Reading this makes me wonder if the combination of very dry > pegs and wetter surrounding timber will be susceptible to the > same effects as the mortise and tenon joints in Windsor chairs. > > In his early stages, Mike Dunbar used to recommend that the > tenon material be very dry so that it would swell to lock the > joint together. But later, he said that was a mistake, because > he realized that, as it swelled, the super-dry tenon would > compress the wood fibers around the mortise which would lead > to a looser joint during subsequent wet/dry cycles where the > tenon and mortise might shrink away from each other. I > believe this is his current thinking anyway. > > - Bill I don't know doodly squat about timber framing, but our woodworking club took a look at the church where we hold ou meetings. It's a brick covered, timber frame building from the early 1800's. I seem to recall someone saying that the pegs (tree nails?) were supposed to be left protruding and hammered back it as the structure loosened up. The attic was made from massive oak timbers held together with wicked looking wooden 12" spikes. Bill Millios (wmillios@a...), who hasn't had time for the list lately, partly because he's planning on building a timber frame house and shop, would know more about this. Carl |
|||
46743 | alan ferrency <alan@l...> | 1998‑07‑23 | RE: Treenails and jowls |
Warning: this contains a long, boring explanation of theories, with only minimal real-world experience to back it up. Skip it if you're not into that sort of thing. "Bill Clouser" |
|||
46768 | Tom Holloway <thh1@c...> | 1998‑07‑24 | Re: Treenails and jowls |
At 3:11 PM -0400 7/23/98, Bill Millios wrote (Hi, Bill!) on Carl Muhlhausen's dime: >our woodworking club took a look at [a] timber frame building from the >early 1800's. I seem to recall someone saying that the pegs (tree >nails?) were supposed to be left protruding and hammered back it >as the structure loosened up. The attic was made from massive oak >timbers held together with wicked looking wooden 12" spikes. Now you guys went and made me get all cobwebby. My house was built c. 1853 of what around here is called "post-and-beam" construction, like most old barns and much like modern timber framing. Inside the crawl space above the leanto roof off the main 1 1/2 story section the beams are still exposed, and after following this thread I just had to look at the pins I remembered were visible there. One central post is a full 11" x 8", red oak I believe, with cross beams mortised in at the level of the upper floor. The end of the pins that were pounded in still protrude about 4" into the crawl space. I'd have to cut a sample to verify, but I think they are of white oak, and were made square and then chamfered down to an irregular octagon shape, still somewhat larger than the 1" round holes probably made by a boring machine. Closer inspection shows that the pegs (trenails) are compressed by a visible amount where they enter the holes. I grabbed and tried to wiggle each of the four pins I could see, and they are as tight as if part of the beam itself, after about 145 years. Tom Holloway |
|||
46774 | Hal Laurent <laurent@c...> | 1998‑07‑24 | RE: Treenails and jowls |
alan ferrency[SMTP:alan@l...] said: (a bunch of stuff about round mortise and tenon joints being inherently unstable snipped) >The stretchers >in a Windsor chair are compression members, not tension members (in >his book he makes the stretchers 1/4" longer than they should be, to >make sure they're pushing the legs out). Since they work to push the >legs apart, it doesn't help much to construct them to resist a >pulling-out force. Okay, here's where I'm really confused. I've heard this theory before (probably from Mike Dunbar's newsletter), but I don't yet understand it. Could someone explain to me how the stretchers of a Windsor chair are under compression? I don't deny that it's true, I just don't understand. My more-or-less intuitive analysis indicates just the opposite. Perhaps I should have paid more attention to vectors in high school Physics class. -Hal |
|||
46780 | Cougarjack@a... | 1998‑07‑24 | Re: Treenails and jowls |
In a message dated 98-07-23 13:20:45 EDT, you write: << Reading this makes me wonder if the combination of very dry < pegs and wetter surrounding timber will be susceptible to the < same effects as the mortise and tenon joints in Windsor chairs. < In his early stages, Mike Dunbar used to recommend that the |
|||
46795 | "Jeff Gorman" <Jeff@m...> | 1998‑07‑24 | RE: Treenails and jowls |
~ -----Original Message----- ~ From: owner-oldtools@l... ~ [mailto:owner-oldtools@l...]On Behalf Of alan ~ ferrency ~ Sent: Thursday, July 23, 1998 10:26 PM ~ To: oldtools@l... ~ Cc: Bill Clouser ~ Subject: RE: Treenails and jowls ~ As for real-world experience... does anyone have a wooden post and ~ rung chair more than a few years old that doesn't have loose tenons? Yes. See my home page for an ash chair made about 35 years ago. I've just checked it and found no loose tenons. It was just glued together when I didn't know about these fancy theories about the orientation of annual rings. Mind you, the diameters are fairly small so the chair is fairly springy, disconcerting for some of the heftier of our friends. I've been meaning to learn from experience and make a better one for the last 34.95 years. Jeff |
|||
46796 | alan ferrency <alan@l...> | 1998‑07‑24 | RE: Treenails and jowls |
On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Jeff Gorman wrote: > ~ As for real-world experience... does anyone have a wooden post and > ~ rung chair more than a few years old that doesn't have loose tenons? > > Yes. See my home page for an ash chair made about 35 years ago. > http://www.millard.demon.co.uk/index.html I _knew_ someone was going to provide a counterexample. Unfortunately, I'm not prepared with a snappy response. :) On a side note, that's a really interesting seat. It's made from plywood? How thick is it? Alan |
|||
46801 | au455@c... (Douglas S. Caprette) | 1998‑07‑24 | RE: Treenails and jowls |
Reply to message from laurent@c... of Fri, 24 Jul > >alan ferrency[SMTP:alan@l...] said: > > >>The stretchers >>in a Windsor chair are compression members, not tension members (in >>his book he makes the stretchers 1/4" longer than they should be, to ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>make sure they're pushing the legs out). Since they work to push the ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>legs apart, it doesn't help much to construct them to resist a >>pulling-out force. > >Okay, here's where I'm really confused. I've heard this theory before >(probably from Mike Dunbar's newsletter), but I don't yet understand it. >Could someone explain to me how the stretchers of a Windsor chair >are under compression? I don't deny that it's true, I just don't understand. >My more-or-less intuitive analysis indicates just the opposite. Perhaps >I should have paid more attention to vectors in high school Physics class. > I'll take a stab at this. Since the stretches are longer than the actual distance between the non-stretched legs they bow the legs outward when installed. The springyness of the legs then pushes back on the stretcher holding it tight. If the legs splay too much, or the person sitting on the chair is two heavy then I think that the stretcher might come loose. Over time, I tend to think that the wood would creep and the compression on the stretcher would gradually lessen. Maybe 'over time' is several hundred years, though. Also, since the legs are splayed when the seat is pused down on the legs the splayed legs will be ever so slightly drawn closer together, also putting compressoin on the stretcher, though I expect that is a trivial effect. |
|||
46805 | eoh@k... (Esther Heller) | 1998‑07‑24 | RE: Treenails and jowls |
"Bill Clouser" |
|||
46808 | eoh@k... (Esther Heller) | 1998‑07‑24 | RE: Treenails and jowls |
> > alan ferrency[SMTP:alan@l...] said: > > (a bunch of stuff about round mortise and tenon joints being inherently > unstable snipped) > > >The stretchers > >in a Windsor chair are compression members, not tension members (in > >his book he makes the stretchers 1/4" longer than they should be, to > >make sure they're pushing the legs out). Since they work to push the > >legs apart, it doesn't help much to construct them to resist a > >pulling-out force. > > Okay, here's where I'm really confused. I've heard this theory before > (probably from Mike Dunbar's newsletter), but I don't yet understand it. > Could someone explain to me how the stretchers of a Windsor chair > are under compression? I don't deny that it's true, I just don't understand . > My more-or-less intuitive analysis indicates just the opposite. Perhaps > I should have paid more attention to vectors in high school Physics class. > Ok here is a pitiful attemp at ascii art ___________________ | / / | / / thick chair seat | / / ---/ /------------ / / tapered leg The picture is incorrect in that the leg is conical and going through an equally conical hole. When you assemble the legs and put them into the seat, the lengthwise and crosswise stretchers are oversized by a quarter inch (you ream the conical holes in the seat and fit the legs, then pick off the exact dimensions and add 1/4 inch). The holes in the seat all point away from the center, so you get all the (glue smeared) legs started and pound them home. The thickness of the seat forces the stretchers to compress, the further in you pound the legs the more you are pushing the tops of the legs apart, which pulls the bottoms of the legs together. The force of your weight on the chair is equivalent to pounding the legs in further. The compression is the bottoms of the legs pulling together compressing the stretchers (which are more than half way down the length of the leg so pulling in). In my old "windsor style" dining room chairs the seats are thin and the legs don't go all the way through. The weight of a person sitting on the chair pushes all the legs out and the stretchers are the only thing holding it together (until the glue breaks _again_). The trick in the original style that Mike got early although he hadn't figured out the physics yet when he wrote the book, is the 1/4 oversize on the stretchers, the _thick_ seat, and the tapered leg holes going _through_ the seat. I think John Alexander's chairs are more reliable than commercial, he is taking advantage of the different shape available between wet and dry (I think he is also the author of "the incredible duckbill joint" in FWW on hand tools that is this joint with a spoon bit and very careful grain orientation). The woven seats also add a lot of pull at the top of the legs to stay together. I would be uncomfortable with the longevity of an Alexander chair with a solid seat though... The simplist way to convince yourself is to make a stool with a Dunbar type undercarriage and a round top. You could drawknife the turned parts, the only requirement is a thick top where the legs go through, conical leg tops and seat holes (conceptually like how Morse tapers work) and egg shaped tenon ends in the stretchers. Follow the book to pick off the final stretcher dimensions. Once you have done it it makes perfect sense. Esther eoh@k... |
|||
46861 | "Bill Gustafson" <oldtools@t...> | 1998‑07‑25 | RE: Treenails and jowls |
What you are seeing here is most often as you correctly identified, making dowels - not pegs - These dowels are used in making rakes and the like. > I seem to recall Roy Underhill using a dowel plate for producing > pins on one of his shows. He split pieces of approximate size > with a froe, and then drove them through a drilled hole in a > steel plate. I think there were several sizes of holes so that > he could stage larger pieces to the proper size. > Hope this helps. > |
|||
46865 | "Bill Gustafson" <oldtools@t...> | 1998‑07‑25 | RE: Treenails and jowls |
Treenails, or "trunnals" are made in the following fashion around here (includes Dutch and English history): Start with a dry section of a hardwood tree the length of the nail that you want (if you are using 10 inch timbers the total length will be 10 inches. It is not necessary for either end to be protruding (you of course may like that look but the ends of the pegs can in fact interfere with the finishing of the work). I use a froe to split the log into 1 inch slabs. I then split the one inch slabs into 1 inch square pegs. Normally at this point I go to the shaving horse and take a small bit off each square edge. The pegs are more square than octagon - you have heard of a square peg in a round hole - well that is exactly what you want. One end of the peg is sharpened, starting only about an inch back from the end giving a rather short point. When you have bored the one inch hole through the mortise you insert the tennon and mark the spot in the tennon where the hole would like up. Take the tennon out and move about 1/16 of an inch in the tennon toward the cheek and there drill the one inch hole. This will cause the joint to tighten up when the peg is hammered through the assembly. It really is best to use green wood for the frame and dry wood for the pegs as they will tighten up greatly as it all dries out. By green wood I do not necessarily mean just fallen timbers, it is normal to fell the trees in the winter and then build the structure the following spring and summer. This is so that the majority of the sap is down in the roots and not in the tree itself. > -----Original Message----- > Off-hand I'd say I'll be needing at least a couple hundred > treenails. Is there some trick to producing these in a timely > fashion, or does one have to hack them out one at a time using > a hatchet ? Hewing each one by hand could easily amount to > the most time-consuming operation of the whole construction. |
|||
46880 | Millios@a... | 1998‑07‑26 | Subject: RE: Treenails and jowls |
I have here an advertisement from a fellow up in NH by the name of Scott Northcott, who "specializes in pegs for Timber Frame Construction". RR1 Box 624 Valley Road Walpole, NH 03608 Tel. 603-756-4204 Email: northcott@t... He makes all the pegs for the Timber Framer's Guild projects, and is the main supplier for every timber framer I've met that didn't make his own pegs. He has tapered (1/64 over measurement to 1/64 under), straight (which are actually 1 1/64" in diameter), and pegs chamfered on both ends. He also has "drawbore pegs", which are like the 1" tapered pegs, but first 3 inches is tapered sharply to 5/8" diameter. Pegs are made of air-dried oak or ash. In one of his books, Tedd Benson recommends using a peg that is two inches longer than the timber at hand. That way, if the end of the peg starts to split, you can cut off the end, and continue driving the peg. If your peg is the same size as the timber, then you have two problems - the first is that the starter taper never clears the other side of the timber (to be cut off), and the second is that if the peg starts to split, you're screwed. You really can't back these out once you've got them in there. Stuck, but good. Bill Millios who lurks here from time to time |
|||
46881 | Cougarjack@a... | 1998‑07‑26 | Re: Subject: RE: Treenails and jowls |
In a message dated 98-07-26 00:26:31 EDT, Bill Millios wrote: snip snip for brevity.... << In one of his books, Tedd Benson recommends using a peg that is two inches longer than the timber at hand. That way, if the end of the peg starts to split, you can cut off the end, and continue driving the peg. If your peg is the same size as the timber, then you have two problems - the first is that the starter taper never clears the other side of the timber (to be cut off), and the second is that if the peg starts to split, you're screwed. You really can't back these out once you've got them in there. Stuck, but good. Bill Millios who lurks here from time to time >> Excellent points Bill! (pun intended!) They're even a b**ch to drill out! Ship augers don't like cutting end grain much, especially compressed stuff! DAMHIKT...only way is to drive them all the way through like the arrow that got stuck in Gus's legbone in Lonesome Dove. BTW, talk about nontraditional timberframing, have you ever seen Benson's shop? Only wood handled thing in there is the pull chain for the terlet! We got a power scarfer, a power mortiser, a power tennoner, a power chamfer burfl, a power hole-putter-inner, a power dovetailer, a power surfacer, a power everything! Nick, who always seems to be making some sort of points... |
|||
46952 | "John McCoy" <mccoy@p...> | 1998‑07‑27 | Re: Treenails and jowls |
On Jul 26, 12:23am, Millios@a... wrote: > He has tapered (1/64 over measurement to 1/64 under), straight > (which are actually 1 1/64" in diameter), and pegs chamfered on > both ends. > > He also has "drawbore pegs", which are like the 1" tapered pegs, > but first 3 inches is tapered sharply to 5/8" diameter. > > Pegs are made of air-dried oak or ash. > > In one of his books, Tedd Benson recommends using a peg that > is two inches longer than the timber at hand. At home I have a book, who's title & author escape me right now, about the construction of clipper ships. The author collected essentially all info published in books and newspaper reports from the time (1850's), and produced an amazingly detailed explanation of all aspects of wooden ship construction. Anyway, he devotes 4 or 5 pages to treenails, with some interesting notes: Treenails were usually locust, with white oak as a second choice. Treenails were either round or octagonal (8-square), with apparently no consensus on whether the octagonal shape help better. They were split from stock square, and either shaved (hatchet or drawknife) or turned to final shape. Treenails often had the last 2 inches left square, to aid in driving (bigger target, I guess); this would be cut off later. Treenails would be stored in a boiler room to ensure being as sry as possible when driven. They usually were not tapered, or only for a very short distance to ease starting. Sometimes long treenails would be shaped with a step (i.e. from 7/8 to 1-1/4 dia) to align with the faying surfaces of the two pieces being joined. This made driving the long treenails easier. John |
|||
47069 | "Stieglitz, Michael (NJAOST)" <MStieglitz@N...> | 1998‑07‑29 | Re: Subject: RE: Treenails and jowls |
In response to Cougarjack's comments about Ted Benson's shop containing every power tool imaginable. I took a 1 week class at Benson's shop several years ago and he's right. Not only do they own the stuff mentioned, a power hole-putter-inner??? ( I'm about ready for one of those), but Ted also found, rescued and restored or rebuilt either a massive old two sided planer or a four bladed tenon cutter. He has both. Probably the planer, I think they had the tennoner built for them. But, in addition to the power everything, all the guys who cut frames there carry framing chisels, often in a sheath hanging from their belt (how cool is that). Immediately, after the class I had a leather guy in New Hope, PA (no shortage of them) make a sheath made for my 1 ½" L&IJ White framing chisel. But the chisel is long and I'm not, and the thing almost hung below my knee so it wasn't too cool to wear, especially at Jack Sobon's class, which I took the following year. In any case, Ted's guys are just fine with a chisel. Some of them had Japanese slicks. Can't get much sexier than that. A funny story, at least I thought so, from Jack's class. Jack is the Galoot poster boy, in my mind. I'd guess that anybody who has met him would concur. Anyway, Jack's class was relocating and rebuilding a barn outside Pittsfield MA. The site had no power save for a generator used by the concrete contractors. All our work was done sans power, normal for Jack. On the last day, during a break at the raising, we encourage Jack to tell some stories. He's a great storyteller and has a lot of material. The philosophical differences between Jack and Ted are apparent. I doubt Ted cuts much wood anymore, although I'd love to be able to afford a frame from his company. During the stories, a couple of helicopters fly across the valley overlooked by the building site. The copters are in formation. Jack says, there goes Ted and the Beam Team to their next raising. He also had a recollection of a meeting with Roy Underhill at some woodworking show, and came away unimpressed with Roy's care for his tools, a broadax, in this case. On a side note, I have been frequently entertained and educated by Cougarjack's posts to the list. His knowledge and ability to describe things clearly and in detail is unsurpassed. But who is this guy? I can't find his bio. Michael Stieglitz Mstieglitz@n... |
|||
47072 | au455@c... (Douglas S. Caprette) | 1998‑07‑29 | Re: Subject: RE: Treenails and jowls |
Reply to message from MStieglitz@N... of Wed, 29 Jul > > >But, in addition to the power everything, all the guys who cut frames there >carry framing chisels, often in a sheath hanging from their belt (how cool >is that). Immediately, after the class I had a leather guy in New Hope, PA >(no shortage of them) make a sheath made for my 1 =" L&IJ White framing >chisel. But the chisel is long and I'm not, and the thing almost hung below >my knee so it wasn't too cool to wear, especially at Jack Sobon's class, >which I took the following year. Why don't you strap the chisel to your back with the handle extending up past you shoulder so you can just reach back beside your head and draw it out. This would be sort of like how Xena carries her sword. Talk about shiny brass acoutriments--but I digress. Just be careful slipping back into the sheath. |
|||
47150 | Cougarjack@a... | 1998‑07‑31 | Who IS this guy? Was: RE: Treenails and jowls |
|
|||
Recent | Bios | FAQ |