Dowel Joinery Opinions

[Jon van der Linden]

Are you sure about that? I knew they were small, but not THAT small?

Talking about the wall hung cabinets with the dowel assembly... yes, they are that small. I think there are depth dimensions in his first book. (Not all the dimensions are correct, so you do have to think a little just to verify that it's not way off.) The width is generally within the size of a standard sheet of paper, 8-1/2" to about 11" although there are some narrower and wider. Their scale and lightness reminds me a lot of some 18th c. French work.

[Trevor Walsh]

I'm building a small wall cabinet at the moment and am after the overhang you're interested in. I too had some doubts about the dowel, but in a case piece like this (mine is 7" deep, 16" tall and 12" wide) they are okay, and plenty sound enough for the keys that will be going into it. If however you were making a case for your brick collection to hang on the wall, I'd say you have to go with dovetails, and apply molding or something similar to get the needed strength.

[David Keller NC]

I am just curious what the general consensus is here on the merit of dowel carcass joinery. Would it be worth the extra effort to go through with M/T joinery in place of the dowels or would dowels suffice in a fine cabinet that is meant to last 100 or more years?

One aspect of your question may be self-answered. If you are interested in making a piece (any piece, not just a cabinet) to last the ages, then picking from the list of standard techniques based on saving effort may not be the best choice. That doesn't necessarily mean that one would want to use a non-standard method that is lots of extra effort just for the purpose of spending extra effort (think claw-type through dovetails that have to be carved). But in the plethora of routine methods available to a woodworker, more effort mostly means "better".

An example - there is nothing structurally wrong with biscuits or pocket-screw joinery, but that doesn't mean that I would use it on a signed piece of furniture. Shop cabinets, yes, but queen anne highboy, no.

[Jon van der Linden]

One aspect of your question may be self-answered. If you are interested in making a piece (any piece, not just a cabinet) to last the ages, then picking from the list of standard techniques based on saving effort may not be the best choice. That doesn't necessarily mean that one would want to use a non-standard method that is lots of extra effort just for the purpose of spending extra effort (think claw-type through dovetails that have to be carved). But in the plethora of routine methods available to a woodworker, more effort mostly means "better".

An example - there is nothing structurally wrong with biscuits or pocket-screw joinery, but that doesn't mean that I would use it on a signed piece of furniture. Shop cabinets, yes, but queen anne highboy, no.

To quote Ruhlmann, "your craftsmanship is holding you back!"

You've really got it backwards here. It's about design. It's about a specific stylistic choice which does something that's the opposite of what's structurally sound. It's about some very thin light pieces of wood. It may actually be that dowels are stronger in this particular application, something you don't seem to consider.

Keep in mind that the "overhang" of the top and bottom is probably only 1/16" or so, just enough to exist. Making a through mortise will change the aesthetics of the piece, and because of the very thin amount of material on one side of it, a mortise may actually be weaker than a dowel. Whether you like his aesthetics or not, Krenov was thoughtful about his choices and certainly capable of making mortises if he thought it was appropriate.

[David Keller NC]

You've really got it backwards here. It's about design.

That's actually precisely what I meant - there is nothing structurally wrong with biscuits or pocket screws, and in some cases they would be the best method. But I would not use them for aesthetic reasons.

Though if I chose to make a cabinet with so little overhang and out of thin stock, I would personally do one of two options - dovetail the case together an apply a small covering molding (the most probable route), or if it was intended to hang from a wall so that the top and bottom would not typically be highly visible, I would screw the case together and plug the holes. If done carefully so that the grain lined up, they would be difficult to see.

But I would know they were there, so option #1 would be the high likelyhood outcome.

[Chris Fournier]

I don't use dowels for much in my work, I've never really thought much of them. I have used them for registration pins on furniture that was intended to be assembled and dissassembled during it's lifetime.

To join a carcass like a Krenov cabinet I would reach for a biscuit joiner. You can use the BJ on the overhanging top no sweat.

[Jon van der Linden]

I don't use dowels for much in my work, I've never really thought much of them. I have used them for registration pins on furniture that was intended to be assembled and dissassembled during it's lifetime.

To join a carcass like a Krenov cabinet I would reach for a biscuit joiner. You can use the BJ on the overhanging top no sweat.

Riiiiiight... so you would use a biscuit joiner "no sweat" on a 3/8" thick piece of wood???

[Chris Fournier]

Riiiiiight... so you would use a biscuit joiner "no sweat" on a 3/8" thick piece of wood???

Yeesssss, you said 3/8" Jon, I've yet to see a Krenov carcass made with 3/8" thick stock except for perhaps a backer panel and I'm sure that at 3/8" that would be in a rabbeted channel. I'm not sure that you have a point except that you don't like biscuit joiners perhaps?

[Jon van der Linden]

That's actually precisely what I meant - there is nothing structurally wrong with biscuits or pocket screws, and in some cases they would be the best method. But I would not use them for aesthetic reasons.

Though if I chose to make a cabinet with so little overhang and out of thin stock, I would personally do one of two options - dovetail the case together an apply a small covering molding (the most probable route), or if it was intended to hang from a wall so that the top and bottom would not typically be highly visible, I would screw the case together and plug the holes. If done carefully so that the grain lined up, they would be difficult to see.

But I would know they were there, so option #1 would be the high likelyhood outcome.

You're still placing construction first and aesthetics of the piece second.

Adding applied moldings would give an entirely different feel to the work, as would "difficult to see" holes, whether for screws or mortises. If you make a case for these solutions improving the aesthetics of the piece as a whole, then you might have a point.

As far as mechanics, the dowels work very well. Not sure why you insist on finding a different solution, especially one that fundamentally affects the aesthetics.

[Tom McMahon]

There are two separate discussions going on here. One is about the engineering of a cabinet or how to build the strongest cabinet. The other is about the visual design of a cabinet or how to execute a visual statment with engineering that is adequate and does not affect the statement.

[Tony Shea]

Trevor,

Have you actually started the case construction yet? I'd be interested in the method you use for your dowel registration. I was probably just going to make my own shop made jig such as Krenov shows in his writings with a registration tab on the end of it. But I've seen a jig on the market for dowelling called the Joint Genie that looked very similar to the design Krenov uses on his shop made version. The Joint Genie might prove to be slightly more accurate. But the last jig I purchased has yet to see the light of day and probably so would this thing. Just curious how you plan to execute or how you have executed your joinery for this case.

[Jon van der Linden]

Yeesssss, you said 3/8" Jon, I've yet to see a Krenov carcass made with 3/8" thick stock except for perhaps a backer panel and I'm sure that at 3/8" that would be in a rabbeted channel. I'm not sure that you have a point except that you don't like biscuit joiners perhaps?

So I guess you've seen the big sign that says no biscuits at the College of the Redwoods (aka the Krenov school)? But I'm a rebel, so I do have a biscuit joiner. In general though, if the stock is thick enough for a biscuit there are better ways, although few are faster.

Regarding my math and your experience with Krenov's work... obviously I have no way to judge your experience, but you do imply that you've at least seen his personal work being restored, because how else would you know how thick his backer panels are? I don't have that kind of experience, but I can show a photo.

3/8" is roughly 1 cm, in the photo it's clear that the piece being doweled is thinner than the guide block which is about 1 cm. So yes, I did say 3/8" because that's what it is.

doweljig.jpg

[Chris Fournier]

So I guess you've seen the big sign that says no biscuits at the College of the Redwoods (aka the Krenov school)? But I'm a rebel, so I do have a biscuit joiner. In general though, if the stock is thick enough for a biscuit there are better ways, although few are faster.

Regarding my math and your experience with Krenov's work... obviously I have no way to judge your experience, but you do imply that you've at least seen his personal work being restored, because how else would you know how thick his backer panels are? I don't have that kind of experience, but I can show a photo.

3/8" is roughly 1 cm, in the photo it's clear that the piece being doweled is thinner than the guide block which is about 1 cm. So yes, I did say 3/8" because that's what it is.

doweljig.jpg

Wow, you play pretty fast and loose with facts and logic Jon.

If stock is thick enough to take a biscuit, and there are very small biscuits available, well below the 0 size then what are the better methods that are slower? Part of the efficacy of the biscuit joint is the speed of the process. If it holds, its fast and it suits the project construction what would you recommend that would be better? And by better I mean what would hold as well as the biscuits and be easier to accomplish?

Regarding math and experience I'm at a loss regarding your conclusions. I have indeed seen several Krenov pieces in the hands of friends who collect furniture. I have had time to pour over them and - gasp - even touch them! While I am not a Redwoods grad, I have met and talked with Krenov and I asked him about the dowel joinery and he stated that it let him build the look that he wanted with a minimum of fuss. I should add that this was before biscuits were about. I can't agree with your extrapolations taken from the photo you attached either. While the photo is pretty fuzzy I'd say that you're looking at 5mm holes, the bottom of their circumference being again about 5mm from the table surface and the top of the guide being about 8mm above the holes for a total height of the guide of 18mm or 5/8". The piece being doweled is harder to make out but I'd say that it's at least 1/2 thick.

Nonetheless it seems that the sum of your experience with this matter comes down to having read the same books that I did. Attitude is no attidote for a lack of facts.

[Phil Thien]

3/8" is roughly 1 cm, in the photo it's clear that the piece being doweled is thinner than the guide block which is about 1 cm. So yes, I did say 3/8" because that's what it is.

doweljig.jpg

Something doesn't make sense.

Krenov is a big fan of knife hinges.

He mortises the hinges into the cabinets and doors.

If you look closely at the proportions of the knife hinges to the stock, it is clear that the typical stock thickness has to be 5/8" to 3/4" thick.

If we were to insist that the stock were 3/8", that would be the knife hinges were 3/16" wide.

Furthermore, the drawers and inside doors are approx. three quarters to one-half the thickness of of the carcase. So you'd be talking about 3/16" to 1/4" thick components there. That doesn't make sense.

What do you think?

[David Keller NC]

You're still placing construction first and aesthetics of the piece second.

To me, "aesthetics" is a lot more complex than the look, surface ornamentation (or the lack thereof) and proportions of a piece. How it's constructed has at least as much contribution.