I am planning to build a 38 inch wide 12/4 mahogany door with a thermal window for my front entrance. Although I am a reasonably experienced wood working I am a bit afraid of making large mortise and tenons – and I like to make things as simply as possible. So I am considering two alternatives:
Can I glue up the 12/4 rail and style out of three 4/4 pieces and glue them up such that I create both the mortise and the tenon “artificially”. So, for the rail I would run the middle piece of 4/4 long to create a tenon and for the style I would leave a piece out to create the mortise?
If you don`t like that – how about using domino joints? Are they strong enough?
Any advice would be appreciated.
Replies
I would suggest double mortise and loose tenon construcation. Use a plunge router with spiral upcut bit. It won't take long.
Many thanks - I had not thought of that. I am still a bit weary about getting a perfectly flat door if my mortises are off a bit. How deep would you go?
A number of years ago, FWW did a failure test of woodworking joints, hydraulicly forcing made-up joints to failure, and the strength winner by far was the biscuit joint. Since reading that, I've almost always built my exterior doors that way, unless I had some other reason to use another method (historic restoration, etc.) and have been very satisfied with the strength and simplicity of construction. Occaisionally I'll use long short-grain splines with a flycutter instead, but it's almost the same thing. You get a huge glue surface area, and minimal reduction of the wood strength in the joint area, unlike mortices.
Wow - thanks very much. Do you think domino joints are stronger than biscuits? Spline stronger than both?
ap
I assume a domino joint is the same or similar to a loose tennon. The biscuit joint is probably the strongest, since it removes the least wood from the door elements. The biggest downside to long splines is the stock can spread a little when the wet glue is applied to the long slots. The only downside I can see to the domino is the same as the downside of the mortice, that you structurally weaken the wood with a larger void.
By the way, in case it isn't obvious, you need to use a lot of biscuits. Where a 6" rail meets a similar stile, you might use two rows of two biscuits, 1/2" below the face from each side, and you might put a fifth in the middle. Where a 10" base rail meets the stile, you might use eight or more biscuits. The joint needs to be an easy fit so you don't sqeeze out too much glue during clamp-up. Another non-obvious point, wait a day or to after glue-up before planing or sanding, because all that glue area will fatten the joint area with moisture. If you finish size it too early, it will shrink undersize when it fully dries out. Good luck !
This is the domino joiner (from festool) they claim to be stronger that biscuits.
http://www.festoolusa.com/category.aspx?ID=15
I haven't used the domino system, can't say anything one way or another about it except guesses. That system didn't exist at the time of the FWW test. It looks effective, like it benefits from the best aspects of biscuits and loose tennons.
I may be mis-remembering the test results, is this something available in the website archives ? If not, I'll try to look it up in my back issues. Nevertheless, the biscuit joint is very strong, compleatly reliable, and vastly simpler than a mortice and tennon . That doesn't mean you shouldn't do a M&T joint, it's good to know how to make one correctly, and configure it correctly for different situations, and all the parts of it are good skills to master, much the same with dovetails. But the best technology to use is the best balance between aesthetics and practicality in the mind of the builder, within the requirements of the job. For me, that changes with almost every project.
Tenons are stronger than biscuits...http://www.woodworking.org/WC/GArchive98/Abstract/abstract5.html
A couple of things:
As for whether gluing up three 4/4 is a ``professional`` method, I thought that this was step toward a stave core door and would add stability because of the laminations. I just figured that as long as I was going to glue up or stability, why not make the mortise and tenons part of the glue up.
As for the strength of a mortise v. biscuits or domino, I want to be efficient and not overbuild for the sake of tradition (I am not lazy). My thinking is that the weakest link in any door is by far where the hinge screws enter the rail. Their depth, and the splitting strength of the wood is the limiting factor. If they hold, a biscuit or domino certainly will.
On stave core: http://www.woodweb.com/knowledge_base/Door_Core_Alternatives.html
One thing I see a little too much of here is classical woodwork methods used just because they were before. Certainly in a large door the total structural strength of a T&G is completely sufficient, but remember a century ago there was no other comperable way to do that same job. Of the hundreds of old doors I've seen, the major cause of failure was glue deterioration. Hide glue will rot or whatever in a century. But that doesn't make T&G the best or most cost effective (important to non-hobbyists) joint in modern wood engineering, just one of a range of possible choices. Of all the doors I've built with biscuits, I haven't had a single failure for any reason. These include restaurant and other public buildings with high traffic and poor maintainence.
I believe Gohab is talking about using a traditional design method because he refers to STYLES and RAILS-which infers that he wants to do a frame and panel type door.
Tongue and groove don't come into it unless he wants to do a batten type door i.e just join up boards like a table top....
I fail to see how one can expect to get sufficient strength using biscuits when joining house door rails to styles, but there could be a case for them if he were doing a batten door.
Anyway, a century ago basically the same designs were used to make SOLID doors as today i.e frame and panel, ledge brace and batten, frame and batten etc in which both mortice and tennon and or tongue and groove were used.
If a "classical" method is used it is because it is thought to be best: I observed that first hand in Geneva where doors made yesterday are the same basic construction as those behemoths (15 feet tallx very thick) made a few hundred years ago.Philip Marcou
Philip,
Many people dearly want what they believe to be true, and say things like " I find it hard to believe... " I'm not talking of something I want to be true, I have no vested interest in biscuits being a good solution to stile and rail construction, I'm just trying to share with a guy that mortice (mortise ?) and tennon is not the only way to make a successful door. And again, a lot of people have some concept of the "purity" of classical woodwork, as if Thomas Chippendale wouldn't have used a thickness planer if he had one available. In every age, people have used the most efficient and successful technology available, and once, before modern adhesives, that was wedged mortice and tennons. Whether or not that is still true is up to each of us to decide, but decide by trying the alternatives.
Thumbnailed, I find it hard to believe that you think biscuits are in any way comparable to mortise and tenon ( traditional construction) on a 3" thick exterior door.
First off rail to stile connection, end grain to long grain (weak at best) on a door this size. Biscuits offer no real strength to counter the racking forces vertically.
Lets assume that biscuits are on par with mortise and tenon construction, Why did Festool come along with the domino. Must know something that we do not. I have never used a domino and in this scenario most likely would not.
In reply to trying the alternatives, Mortise an tenons ( proven technique ) Biscuits, I suspect the jury will be out for quite some time. As for modern adhesives I agree, much improved .
At best a biscuit, ( IMO) a weak form of a loose tenon, the best glue will not be on par with a double tenon and said glue.
This discussion has nothing to do with purity or Mr Chippendale, Just common sense.
Respectfully, Tom.
Tom,
When you're using biscuits, believe it or not, grain direction is almost unimportant. When you get the proper number of biscuits in a well fitted joint, there's a huge amount of glue surface area, which is what actually holds the joint together. This is a little counter-intuitive, but still true. I actually had to try to disassemble a joint that had only tacked up, because of a layout error, and I couldn't get it apart without breaking the rail end, and had to re-make it.
I only brought up Chippendale because some resistance to new methods of construction seems to come from a quasi-religeous worship of classic methods. Every time I try to express this idea, someone interprets it to be a criticism of classic woodworking. It couldn't be farther from the truth. I'm the biggest supporter of skilled handtool use. I'll often have a job done with a handtool while the other guy is still looking for a place to plug in.
Consider the possibility that what you see as common sense might be comfort in what you're familliar with. Again, I have no vested interest in biscuit technology, I just know from first-hand experience that it works, and works well. Why argue about it ? Try making up a sample stile/rail with as many biscuits as can easily fit in the rail endgrain, then try to break it. Then tell me what you think.
Thumbnailed, " Why argue about it ? " No argument here just my opinion Vs yours. I do respect your opinion as I do use biscuits from time to time, just as I will use my 23 gauge pin nailer for certain applications and 10 , 12 , 16 pennies for others.
You will find no resistance to new methods of construction from me. I like to mix the old with the new. In reading your statements I believe we share some of the same sentiments . I have some nice hand tools and enjoy using them, although I am no more fond of them than my corded tools.
As for this 3" thick door and the opinions expressed on preferred construction techniques, I will agree to disagree. Thank you for responding to my post, you are in part what makes a site like this interesting.
Much respect, Tom.
Edited 8/14/2008 12:12 am ET by gofigure57
Anybody who thinks that biscuits are appropriate on three inch thick entry doors needs to just be allowed to go along their merry little blissful way. They are either not actually building doors but only reading articles in magazines about doing it, or reality hasn't quite caught up with them yet. It will.
Talib,
It is also possible that some folk may not have understood the post or the question(s) correctly, that is why there is a need to discuss the thing more, instead of simply telling everyone to take road.....Lighten up, the Taliban have no use for diplomacy.Philip Marcou
The original post asked about stile and rail joinery for a 3" thick door.
I'm quite sure that a traditional mortise and tenon is the way to go or perhaps a loose, but adequately sized, tenon(s). Not biscuits, not the Domino machine, etc., etc.
---Osama
Edited 8/14/2008 9:43 am ET by BossCrunk
"Osama", Your killing me.
Tom.
Boss,
Just because you believe something doesn't make it true, and the more disdainfully you state your case doesn't make it more convincing. I haven't built a 3" door with biscuits, but I wouldn't hesitate to do so if someone contracted my company to make one. The bigger the door, the more biscuits can be used, the more surface area for glue bond. I'm not saying it's better than M&T , just that it will work. I might go the insurance rout with that large a door, and use a flycutter and scale up and custom make a larger biscuit, to get a slightly deeper bite in the stock, but I don't think that would invalidate my point, any more than you scaling your M&T joint. It would then still be a vastly simpler construction, therefore more cost effective, and easier for someone less skilled to build a successful door.
Be my guest.
and custom make a larger biscuit..
I thind a floating tenon that is!
Floating tennon, short grain spline, whatever, the point was that a successful door could be built without mortice and tennon construction, contrary to the opinion of several contributors, one in particular whose snide responses were backed by nothing other than uninformed opinion. It's one thing to hold something to be true, and quite another to be unwilling to look beyond what you already know.
"the point was that a successful door could be built without mortice and tennon construction"
I think the point of the response was that your joint WAS a mortice and tenon joint --just a loose tenon joint with really short tenons.
Looking at the pics, I wonder how much stronger the joint would have been if the "biscuits" were, say, 5 or 6 inches wide, so you would have had to break off much more of the stile for the joint to fail. Note that I am not trying to argue that your method would not be strong enough. (Heck, it always amazes me that cabinet doors don't fall apart with nothing more than stub tennons cut with a coping bit.) Just wonderin' is all. After all, at the end of the day, you don't need "as strong as possible", just "strong enough".
It is worth noting that your joint relies pretty much entirely on the glue bond to hold it together -- which may or may not be compromised with time. A pegged mortise and tennon joint could function forever with no glue at all.
As is usually the case, there isn't one "right" answer -- just different choices, each with its own merits and shortcomings.
Mike HennessyPittsburgh, PA
I am curious to know if you think you would save much time with the custom style biscuits? Interesting test. With my HCM and shaper I can make mortise and tennons fairly quick, but I know the OP didnt have that equipment and his original question was contemplating joint options.
Brad
Brad,
I think that would depend entirely on your tooling. The cutom biscuits or loose tennons I made took about 10 minutes total to make, and you'd have the efficiency of multiples in making more. If I was going to do a M&T, I'd have to lay it out, bore and square the mortice (I personally would probably do a blind, not wedged mortice), and saw the tennon with a tablesaw jig. After dryfitting and fine adjustment, glueup and clamping. Just a guesstimate, it would probably take me 3-4 times as long, and I'd need longer sticks for the rails, to allow for the tennons. I think I'd go with a domino type system first. It would also be more efficient if you could leave a dedicated setup, but in my shop I almost never do the same operation more than a few times in any given month, and need to have multiple uses for almost all equipment.
I decided to put my money where my mouth is, unlike some who seem to only know where their mouth is. I took some scrap sepele, the only leftover stock I had in shop of the right sort of dimensions, and made up some custom 1/4" biscuits, slotted the parts with a 1/2" slotting cutter, did a careful but not too careful glue-up, then left the sample over the holiday weekend. Tuesday I broke the joint with a bar clamp and, lo and behold, the joint stayed intact, and the wood failed nearby. The end grain behaved as if it was welded to the long grain. To get a door to fail with 4 or 6 similar joints would cause so much damage to the rest of the door that the corner failure would be irrelevant, and would not occur in normal use. Now you don't have to take my word for it.
Edited 9/2/2008 5:18 pm ET by thumbnailed
So how was your holiday weekend ? I am building some entry doors for my home as well , I am using simple mortise and tenon with through pegs.
Your last post should push this thread close to 100 posts , good luck.
Nice job on the test joint. Doors should hold up just fine.
Tom.
Thanks for the effort, and hopefully I am not ranked as "combative".
I see that the style is quarter sawn- you could get more strength by using flatsawn stuff there.
I don't think too many folk are disputing that this type of joint well done is not strong. What is being said is that over time it more susceptible to both mechanical and chemical failure than the m&t, and therefore ranks as inferior , especially when the door is heavy and intended for long life. I think your experiment, though useful, still doesn't make a conclusive score.Philip Marcou
Phillip,
The stock I used was the only scrap of the right size I had available, and part of the point I was trying to make was that I wasn't selecting the most optimal material or taking the greatest care in fabrication, but knocking out a joint in a workmanlike manner with whatever came off the pile. The only potential failure would be chemical breakdown of the glue over time, and I don't know how you might address that other than waiting to observe a failure. As I said in a previous post, I've had doors like this hanging for a decade without failure, that's the best case I can make.
If I was building an heirloom front door for my Craftsmen bungalow, I might well consider a M&T, but I make highly crafted custom products for the high-end custom home market, and I have a duty to my customers to give them the best product I can for their dollar, and I feel that this construction method meets that criteria. I have never had a door I built this way fail, and have only seen one pair of screen doors built this way fail, because of someone elses sloppy workmanship. I reglued them, they are standing square and true now.
I personally don't care whether anybody builds doors this way, just that the guy who started this thread wanted to know if there were other reliable ways to build doors. There are.
Okay. As a matter of further interest: for doors you make for customers are you making the "biscuits"rather than using the ready made ones? I would tend to think that your own would be advantageous due to closer fit tolerances and being of the same wood as the door.Philip Marcou
Phillip,
That kind of depends, like so many things. the last one I made had custom biscuit/tennons, the previous was straight-up #20 biscuits. The biscuit one was a thicker door, with wider rails and a very wide bottom rail, and I was able to put three rows of biscuits in the thickness. The criteria I choose is a little arbitrary, but it basically is to get the most surface area of connectivity between elements. If someone else has designed the door, architect for example, and the rail size doesn't allow at least two biscuits in the width, I'd make custom pieces. If you're inclined to try this method, make sure your butt cuts are very square, and apply glue to the endgrain first, then reglue again before assembly, since the endgrain sucks up glue, and you don't want a glue-starved joint. Also clamp lightly, for the same reason. The glue is doing the majority of the work in this method, so good glueing tecnique is very important. If you try it, let me know how it works for you. Good luck.
Go,
" My thinking is that the weakest link in any door is by far where the hinge screws enter the rail. Their depth, and the splitting strength of the wood is the limiting factor. "
This is not so but a common mis-conception. The screws have in fact little stress to cope with: all they do is keep the hinges tight in their housings.It is these housings/shallow mortices which are critical-they must be close fitting.
It is simple physics: the load is downwards so the lower "shoulders" of each hinge mortice bear the weight of the door. The actual moment about the hinges forces are low because the door is comparatively narrow compared to the height.
People often think that very long screws are necessary-in fact it is far more effective to ensure that 1)the hinge mortice is accurately cut and of suitable depth 2) the screws are matching diameter to the hinge holes (not smaller) and the heads match the counter-sink and 3)pilot holes are drilled to cater for both screw shank and thread i.e two hole diameters to be sure that the screws cut effective threads and do not cause splits in the frame because shanks are tight. Ofcourse I am talking of decent hinges-not thin folded sheet metal ones, which means they will be thick and require "deep"" mortices-which means there will be a good sized shoulder for the hinge to bear on.Philip Marcou
Wise words. As a beginner, it took me years to come to the same conclusions, because no one around me reinforced them the way you have. The mortise does more work than the screw, and its a good idea to space the hinges as far apart as possible. I used to really dig the 'no mortise' cab door hinges, but to more, for these reasons and others. Brian
Gohabs, In order for the hinge screws to enter the rail, would they not have to go through the stile, I am confused by your post.
Tom.
Edited 8/12/2008 10:33 pm ET by gofigure57
I believe he meant the style, or if the tenons are through tenons the screws may go into end grain-but one should be able to position hinges to avoid that.Philip Marcou
I meant the stile, not the rail. I have never seen hinges mounted so that the screw would enter the rail. In any case, I undertand Phil`s point (and I learned something too!).
Thanks, Rickl.
This is certainly a debated subject.
I am making interior four doors main floor are curly yellow birch and upstairs are ash.I still have several to make but the last one I put together with a domino. This door was very rigid when it was done. The first ones I did with splines. The doors constructed with the domino were stiffer when picked up at a corner.The last door that I did which was done with the domino is hung is our master bedroom bathroom door that is exposed to moisture at least twice a day. It has held up very well so far. I made it in the winter and has gone through the summer humidity. Time will tell when the heat is kicked on and everything dries out.
Here is a link showing how I constructed the doors that are done so far.
http://www.superwoodworks.com/Projects/PanelDoors.htmhttp://www.superwoodworks.com
Very very nice. Thanks.
Garry,
Very nice setup, it looks like a very well thought out process.
Mike,
You might call those loose tennons, or many other things, I'm not an expert at terminology. The intent was to demonstrate a joint method vastly simpler than a traditional M&T joint, easier to lay out and fabricate, that wouldn't compromise door strength. Dominoes or longer loose tennons would probably add additional strength to the joint, but I'm still working with last century's tooling and haven't had a job that justified new tooling yet. Probably soon, though, since its pretty clearly an improvement. The only issue I can see that might, long term, be a problem, is glue deterioration, but I haven't seen any sign in the doors I've had hanging for a decade.
I hope I haven't come accross as too combative, and if so, I apologise. This thread got a little testy a while back, for no reason I was able to figure out. There seem to be some on this site who value argument and oneupmanship more than discussion and information sharing. You gentlemen are excellent examples of the latter sort. Thanks for sharing.
The tenon joint was the strongest and failed gradually. The biscuit wasn't as strong and when it failed it failed immediately as I recall the test. Thje loose tenon was pretty much as strong as the integral tenon.
Are you talking about an article by Chuck Ring? If so, maybe we should tighten up the definition of mortise and tenon a little. 3/8" stub tenons glued in a groove don't constitute a mortise and tenon, IMO. Even at that, Ring's study only found biscuits had 80% of the strength of his scaled down version of a mortise and tenon. If it's the same article, Chuck has it on line at: http://www.woodworking.org/WC/GArchive98/Abstract/abstract1.html
I build a front door a couple of years ago out of walnut and used floating tenons with the mortises cut with a router and a 1/2 inch spiral bit. This seems to be a relatively painless way to go. The hardest part was the glue up, be sure to do a dry fit and have extra set of hands when you do the real glue up. Norm did a front door recently on his show and there was an article a few years ago in FWW a couple of years ago. Just be sure your stock is flat and square and I am sure you will do fine.
Troy
That's funny, that's how I joined the base for my workbench. Worked great, not a 'magic' way around the work of joinery, but worked great. All that glueing, though, and at the time I didn't have so many clamps. My experience was that the fii was tighter than expected, so trial fit all the way before adding glue! Good idea for a door, don't think I'd do it if thicker stock were available, though. My bench base was 5 ply of 4/4, with the center ply being either mortise or tenon. It is harder to align things during a glue up than it is to cut a joint the way you want it on a table saw, I think. So don't be afraid of M+Ts, you can hog it out somehow. Check your work and cut your teeth.
Brian
I use to make custom doors.. Very large and thick doors to replace existing DOORS IN VERY OLD HOUSES. Usually the same as it was but a bit newer. I'd think modern glues may work for what you want... BUT nothing beats a hunk of wood or two inside the other part for strength! Sort of like a husband and wife to keep a bond together...
I was in China several times.. I saw HUGE wooden doors. Very wide and very high..
Maybe 20 foot high by 8 foot wide for each door! Just a guess on my part.
Several inches thick! Four to five inches think as I recall.. All.. had double through tenons. Still holding up.. I asked, how old those doors were. The guide told me she had no idea.. This place is about 400 years old and the doors came from a much older building! I belived her!
Edited 8/12/2008 3:57 am by WillGeorge
THREE inches thick?? Holy smoke that is enough to keep out an RPG, and can the house hold this door up? (:)
Laminating as you are considering is not a professional approach but doable and very strong. Stock up on G clamps...
If you are shy of mortise and tenon then this is quite a challenge considering the size and weight of this door, but then again shyness is counter-productive.
The real thing this thick would have double row through tenons wedged and be stronger than biscuits for sure-so what do you want to do -compromise or do a professional job ? You could safely get away with single row tenons around around one inch thick, haunched.
As a matter of interest I recall the test that Rick refers to (no doubt someone will dig it out)and biscuits were inferior as I remember- which is all good and well as nothing will persuade me that anything less than wedged through mortice and tenon will do for a front door which needs to last for many years.Furthermore, using biscuits to join rails to styles for this type of application seems to me to be a mis-use of biscuits and entirely inappropriate.
You will need decent hinges too.... and lock hardware....Philip Marcou
Edited 8/13/2008 5:04 am by philip
For a structure of that age, a 3" thick door was certainly a security measure. It's interesting to look at very old structure (3+ centuries) and see how the architecture decisions were dictated by defensive fortification and security requirements.
There was an article in Fine homebuilding a few years ago that you should look for on making shop doors in three layers that was similar to your proposed method.
Traditional door construction is mortise and tenon with panels. There are many variations on that theme, but essentially the better doors are made in that way. Through tenons greatly help toward stabilizing the door and prevent racking or warping. Biscuits (or dominoes) could in no way offer the same degree of support on such a heavy door as you are proposing.
I'm not so sure about laminating the 4/4 mahogany. My concern would be what effects weather exposure may have over time versus solid construction. If the door would even begin to delaminate after a time, your hard work would be for naught.
Heart,
"I'm not so sure about laminating the 4/4 mahogany. My concern would be what effects weather exposure may have over time versus solid construction. If the door would even begin to delaminate after a time, your hard work would be for naught."
Apart from the clumsy method of construction aspect, not to mention a slight lack of professionalism (;)(;), the concern you raise here is quite real. We don't know what climate the door is subject to , but at the best of times that sort of glueing is chancey, especially when done without the means to apply uniform sufficient pressure. I have seen this method of construction used in a factory: they had the use of purpose made presses to achieve a good bond and avoid slipping and sliding every which place. (That is why I said something about having many G clamps on hand....).
I also said "it is doable"-caveats apply in other words. I suggest if that is the option he takes then he can beef up the laminating by use of screws or even nuts and bolts-plenty of thickness available to counter bore and either plug screw heads and bolt ends with flush plugs or raised ones for decoration. Scope for ingenuity there.
I don't know the actual style of the door or house, or what he means by "thermal glass", so the above may not be applicable in that form.
Obviously the subject of doors is of interest to me....And I would like to see the eventual outcome.Philip Marcou
Philip,I'm interested in seeing the finished product as well. However it turns out,this will be one massive door!
Do you have the hardware for a door this thick?
I would secure the hardware first then start considering the joinery.
Not too many companies out there making stuff for 3" thick doors.
Probably cost a bit too.
Good luck. Sounds like a cool project.
By the way, I would just use regular mortise and tenon joinery.
A drill press and sharp chisel will go a long way to getting the job done.
F.
No, thanks for the heads up. I am not wedded to the thickness so I will adjust if I need to to accomodate available hardware. Up here in the great white north (montreal) I have seen a lot of doors on old houses that are 10/4...maybe not 12.
I have built many, many doors in the last 35 years. All have been mortised and integral tenon, haunched at the top and bottom rails. Most tenons are 3" or longer, and 90% of what we do is cope and stick mortise and tenon. It's all about glue surface and economy of material. I have never seen a joint we made fail. I have replaced many biscuit, dowel, lag screw (!?!), stub tenon, cope and stick (no tenon), and assembled board (as OP proposes) doors. Beyond the way I do it now, I would consider dowels if they can be very accurately placed, sized, etc. Nothing else. Everything else is a compromise. A simplification, if you will. Nothing wrong with historical precedent, in context. Dave S
http://www.acornwoodworks.com
I had a discussion not that long ago with Acornw regarding Stave Core construction. Dave S. or Acornw is one of the expert door builders here (look at his site). I am building my passage doors with Stave core rails/stiles and it has worked well thus far, but his comment was there is a far greater potential for a glueup problem with this setup so he normally uses stable solid stock. Dave's comment made sense as I know I can tend to rush now and again so if I do not roll the glue properly or miss a few spots that could lead to a problem many years down the road. Now I know what you are propossing is not stave core, but it has some similarities with respect to the glueup. Your idea to glue up and incorporate the MT joinery into the glueups makes sense, but I would ask what you plan to use for clamping it all together? My first cores I made with a home made jig that consisted of a glulam spreaders with melamine tops. One jig for the top, and one for the bottom with a lot of clamps to hold it together (found on the woodweb). Now unless you have a ton of time on your hand or plan to make several jigs, you will want to stack multiple parts at each glueup. I found it difficult to keep the individual pieces from shifting while I tightened the clamps. This would lead to a nightmare if one is trying to have accurate tenons. I now have a vacuum press and that makes this process so much easier.
I did use the glueup MT joints for a bench a few years ago. The glueups were easier since the pieces were shorter and narrower. Would I do it again now that I have made traditional MT joints? Nope. Pretty tough to beat the satisfaction of a well executed MT joint.
As to the joinery, I would not contemplate anything other than MT for such a door. Thats what the pros do and I guarantee that they have considered ever possible option over the years.
I will assume you have considered the weatherstripping and all the little details for this door and its frame. If not, please do so now as the project you are about to embark upon is by no means simple and has many little details that will frustrate you down the road.
Good luck.
Brad
Many thanks for the thoughtful advice.
Anyone out there have a good source for weatherstripping and sills?
Alexander
You can use this company or go to the manufacturer PEMCO.http://www.buyweatherstriponline.com/orderinfo.asp?gclid=CJz348Kqi5UCFRItxwod7iI5cQF.PS. look under thresholds for different sill configurations.
I suggest some more research on the woodweb to see the door frame profiles to fit the weather stripping too. You might also want to take a look at the Garniga (shaper cutters) site to see where/how the grooves for the weather stripping are made. I truly hope you are aware of what you are about to start. Building an entrance door is distinctly different than cab doors. This will be true even moreso in your case since you want a 3" thick door.
I realize you are just in the planning stage, but it doesnt sound like you have started any drawings yet. Great starting point and this will help you understand the requirements to complete this task. I would precisely detail everything including the wood species, hinges (including locations), exposure protection details, locksets, mortises, hardware, frame stock, frame profiles and frame joinery.
Brad
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled