From: JBrandt@AAA.UOregon.EDU (Jay Brandt)
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking
Subject: Re: glued-up panels or solid panels???
Date: 26 Aug 92 15:34:35 GMT
Article-I.D.: nntp.1992Aug26.153435.8501
Organization: University of Oregon, Architecture

In article <1992Aug26.040422.4401@afit.af.mil>, fkilpatr@afit.af.mil
(Freeman A. Kilpatrick) writes:
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> I have been recently working on a couple of quilt racks for my wife (I think they
> are kind of silly, but she likes them :)), and the vertical 'sides' of the thing are
> about nine inches wide.  Now the plans I have call for gluing up three 3 1/4" (or
> so) wide boards to form the nine inch panel.  I usually like to follow plans
> explicitly the first time, then experiment with later trials (I'm still kind of
> new).  So what I found myself doing was ripping wide boards into narrow ones, just
> so I could glue them up into wide boards again.
> 
> So I was wondering if this really makes sense.  Is a glued up panel or board more
> stable than a solid one of the same width?  If you had a choice of using a solid
> board for something in the 8-12" range would you use it or would it better to
> glue-up a panel anyway?

The main reason for gluing up a wide panel is to reduce the tendancy to
warp or cup. A single, wide board that has been plainsawn (the usual stock
from your lumberyard) has the maximum tendancy to cup, as the "bark" side
of the wood shrinks faster than the interior side and pulls it out of
shape. One solution to this problem is to use quartersawn wood, rather than
plainsawn. That way the growth rings (as viewed from the end of the board)
are perpendicular to the face of the board, rather than more or less
parallel to it. But quartersawn wood, where available, is more expensive
and has less interesting grain (pretty much straight and featureless). The
other solution is to saw the board into narrower strips and glue them back
together again. There are two ways to glue up the strips. This is difficult
to show in a text-only format, but here goes. See below for an "end view"
of the boards:

1   2
(   (
(   )
(   (
(   )
(   (

In method 1, the bark side faces the same side in each strip. This reduces
the arch of the cup to a series of smaller, less noticable arches. In
method 2 the bark side of the strips alternate as to which face of the
panel they are on. This allows the inevitable cup in each strip to be
"canceled out" by the reverse cup in the next one, and may produce a
flatter board. I have seen many experienced woodworkers disagree on which
way is best. Far more experienced hands have discussed this at length, and
I won't venture to say which is right. Myself, I use whichever way looks
best in the finished product. More often than not I use method 2. I haven't
noticed much difference either way, but both methods are superior to wide
boards. For further information, check out the "Fine Woodworking On I"
series of books. They have reprints of articles from the magazine, grouped
by topic. I seem to recall that Tage Frid had at least one good article on
just this topic. If I can locate it I will post the citation.

I usually only use solid, wide panels in reproductions of period frame &
panel furniture. It's what they did "way back then", so I do it too. The
frame reduces the distortion problems that would otherwise be caused by the
cupping in the wide board.

Jay Brandt
Owner / Designer / Craftsman
Bear Paw Woodworks
Eugene,
Oregon
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking