I just bought a six-foot long, 11″ wide, 16/4 piece of red oak that is flatsawn. It seems perfect for a tabletop that will be 64 X 18 X 2″ (the thickness needs to be a true 2″). My idea was to rip the 4″ stock into 5 pieces a little over 2″ each, then I’ll have essentially what I need to edge-join the tabletop – what used to be a four-inch edge will become a four-inch width. The math works, but I’m concerned that I’ll run into some issues with the flatsawn board. The rings essentially look like a half moon. Am I likely to create a warping problems here, or would I be better off leaving the face intact – I can rip the piece into three widths, then resaw in half, but that’s going to leave me a little short of my 2″ thickness.
You veterans can probably tell that I’m pretty new at this – and would appreciate any help.
Don B
Replies
I prefer the cathedrals of flat sawn lumber. I would re-saw the flat sawn plank and do a bookmatch or slip match glue up.
If you make the 4" edge into individual boards and glue together, you will see a quarter sawn table top of bland ,IMO, grain. Some guys suggest flipping each quarter sawn board so the end grain annual rings of glued adjacent boards are opposite to each other. This is supposed to reduce cupping. Other guys suggest the opposite and site that all annual rings should be the same and the middle of the top secured to prevent cupping.
Get hold of a big mirror and experiment with the grain by looking at the grain with the mirro held in both positions. Pick your favorite.
Don
Edited 12/6/2005 7:36 am ET by DonC
Thanks, Don. I appreciate your reply. From yours and the other replies, it sounds as though I have to select between quarter-sawn and flat-sawn - and stability vs. looks.
If it is flatsawn now, then ripping the board and rotating the pieces 90 degrees will create quarter sawn pieces for the glue up, the best grain orientation for keeping a panel flat. The ripped pieces will probably bow some when they are sawn, but not nearly as badly as they would using your second method.
The pieces, no matter how you cut them, should be stickered and allowed to equalize their moisture content for a week or two before you joint and plane them prior to gluing up the table top. Allowing them to equalize will probably diminish any of the bowing that occurs immediately after sawing the boards out.
Ripping the piece the other way, to create flatsawn boards, will almost certainly give you pieces that will cup the moment they are sawn because of the release of tension that is common in large planks, though allowing them to equalize will probably reduce the cupping.
A table top glued up from flat sawn boards will almost always show more movement, especially ripples or an over all bow across the width, than the same size top made from quarter sawn wood.
John W.
Thanks for your reply, John.
I'm beginning to think that the third reply, from Charles, probably best describes my situation - that I have a piece cut from near the center of the tree. The half-rings are pretty tight near the center of the board, and all form an almost perfect "C". So if I do the 90 degree cut, it sounds like I'll have rift-sawn boards.
The good news is that the design I'm building will allow for some movement - four legs are attached directly to the tabletop with now apron, so I hope that will work.
It sounds like my biggest mistake was at the hardwood dealer yesterday. I was looking at the shape and dimensions of the board, and didn't pay any real attention to how it was cut.
Thanks again for your input on this.
Don
Don,
If you're looking for truely quarter sawn boards(with medullary rays), you're not going to get them from this timber. You state the grain forms a C. With the exception of the very center where the grain runs parallel to the long side of the piece, the boards will be rift sawn and tending toward flat sawn at the ends. But this will vary greatly by the C you describe. If it is a more or less flat C, showing rift sawn at the ends, I would think you would get some nice straight grained boards. If the grain is forming a very round C, the piece was cut from at or near the center of the tree and would/could be much more reactionary. Hope this makes sense.
Chuck
Chuck -
I think you described my situation pretty well. The C is actually pretty tight - as I look at the board I think it might have been cut with one edge very near the center of the tree.
I think I'm going to go with my original solution - my design will allow for some movement, so I'll just have to live with this.
It sounds like my biggest mistake was at the dealer - I'll know more about selection the next time around.
Thanks very much for your input.
Don B
Glad it was helpful. Good luck with your project.
Chuck
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled