02-13-2022, 10:48 PM
Thanks for the encouragement, all!
Tom, the Moxon vise that I built with the hardware that I purchased from you has made a huge difference in the ease and workflow of cutting these dovetails. I'm really glad I took the time to put one together (especially with a bunch of drawers to do yet).
Thanks Adam! That makes sense in terms of the exposed end grain in the back. I'll consider that for the future drawers, especially as they get deeper and will thus have a greater amount that they expand/contract.
Regarding lower sides, I've never liked that feature for shop drawers. I want to know exactly how tall I can stack a tool in the drawer without hitting when I close the drawer. Sides that match the front are helpful for that. It's a little detail, but one that I prefer. Is there any reason other than aesthetics to do this?
Yes, I trapped the bottom in the back, using a groove on all sides. Since these drawers are about 20"x30" and will hold tools, I wanted as much support as I could get around the edges without sacrificing depth for the sake of installing a thicker bottom. The bottoms are 1/4" baltic birch. I left some room for expansion/contraction of the bottom. Is there a structural reason for leaving the back open and nailed from underneath, or just to match 18th century approaches?
Thanks Derek! I thought about the approach of doing through DTs and gluing on a front, but wanted to challenge myself and try the approach that I'm doing. No better way to learn than by doing something, especially if you do it a bunch of times.
Wow, you would go as thin as 1/4" for drawer sides? Going that thin scares me a little, especially if there's a groove to catch the bottom (I could see the approach mentioned by Adam above being more critical for very thin sides/back). I guess the thickness is, of course, dependent on the expected use and loads. 1/4" sides for a small jewelry drawer would be much more appropriate than for shop tools. And I absolutely agree that I'd use something other than exposed slides for a house furniture application, whether that be under-mount commercial slides, something more like a piston-fit approach, or wood slides. You'll also notice on the picture showing the drawer front in the cabinet that I left a gap (~3/32") around all the edges. I would make this much tighter for furniture.
Tyler
tablesawtom Wrote:I agree with Philip 150 per cent. The look prefect to me. Very very well done.
Tom
Tom, the Moxon vise that I built with the hardware that I purchased from you has made a huge difference in the ease and workflow of cutting these dovetails. I'm really glad I took the time to put one together (especially with a bunch of drawers to do yet).
adamcherubini Wrote:Looks good. Little London style. Typically, when drawers had what we call London style pins, they were only in the front of the drawer, not the back. My theory is that the intention was to cover the maximum amount of drawer front end grain. With full DTs I think the intention was to match the exposed end grain so the pieces would move together.
Another nice 18th c feature that might have worked well here is keeping the drawer sides a bit lower than the front. Almost always in those cases, the sides are planed with a hollow plane to round over the top of the side. It’s a thoughtful elegant feature.
Not sure what you did at the back?? Looks like you trapped the bottom in? 18th c bottoms were very often nailed up from underneath, often back and sides. Front was grooved. My advice would be, if you are going to groove the sides and front, hold the back up so you can slide the panel in from the rear.
Thanks Adam! That makes sense in terms of the exposed end grain in the back. I'll consider that for the future drawers, especially as they get deeper and will thus have a greater amount that they expand/contract.
Regarding lower sides, I've never liked that feature for shop drawers. I want to know exactly how tall I can stack a tool in the drawer without hitting when I close the drawer. Sides that match the front are helpful for that. It's a little detail, but one that I prefer. Is there any reason other than aesthetics to do this?
Yes, I trapped the bottom in the back, using a groove on all sides. Since these drawers are about 20"x30" and will hold tools, I wanted as much support as I could get around the edges without sacrificing depth for the sake of installing a thicker bottom. The bottoms are 1/4" baltic birch. I left some room for expansion/contraction of the bottom. Is there a structural reason for leaving the back open and nailed from underneath, or just to match 18th century approaches?
Derek Cohen Wrote:Lipped (rabbeted) half blind dovetails is pretty advanced stuff. Most starting out would have made through dovetails and glued on a front. So well done again!
No problems with the dimensions of the drawers for a tool cabinet. For house furniture I would make the drawer sides 1/4-3/8" thick (erring on the thinner side), and I would not use slides (but in the shop they make perfect sense).
Regards from Perth
Derek
Thanks Derek! I thought about the approach of doing through DTs and gluing on a front, but wanted to challenge myself and try the approach that I'm doing. No better way to learn than by doing something, especially if you do it a bunch of times.
Wow, you would go as thin as 1/4" for drawer sides? Going that thin scares me a little, especially if there's a groove to catch the bottom (I could see the approach mentioned by Adam above being more critical for very thin sides/back). I guess the thickness is, of course, dependent on the expected use and loads. 1/4" sides for a small jewelry drawer would be much more appropriate than for shop tools. And I absolutely agree that I'd use something other than exposed slides for a house furniture application, whether that be under-mount commercial slides, something more like a piston-fit approach, or wood slides. You'll also notice on the picture showing the drawer front in the cabinet that I left a gap (~3/32") around all the edges. I would make this much tighter for furniture.
Tyler