Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [MedievalSawdust] Pavilion Poles & Timber-framing Scarf Joints

Expand Messages
  • Siegfried
    If you look at those designed, they are meant to not come apart via twisting either. They are actually rather ingenious I think ... The only way that they
    Message 1 of 18 , Jul 11, 2005
      If you look at those designed, they are meant to not come apart via
      twisting either. They are actually rather ingenious I think ... The
      only way that they could come apart, in practice, is via 'perfect
      lateral movement' ... any amount of twist or pressure on the joint
      itself, just binds it tight.

      Now, not saying that the wood might not decide to crack itself open
      ... but, still ;)

      Siegfried


      On 7/11/05, Conal O'hAirt Jim Hart <baronconal@...> wrote:
      > In that it was a joint
      > > that disassembled
      > > easily, and just 'held itself together'. No bolts,
      > > no nothing.
      >
      >
      > What about twisting forces?
      >
      >
      >
      > Baron Conal O'hAirt / Jim Hart
      >
      > Aude Aliquid Dignum
      > ' Dare Something Worthy '
      >
      >
      >
      > __________________________________
      > Yahoo! Mail for Mobile
      > Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
      > http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >


      --
      _________________________________________________________________________
      THL Siegfried Sebastian Faust - http://crossbows.biz/
      Barony of Highland Foorde - Baronial Archery Marshal
      Kingdom of Atlantia - Deputy Kingdom Earl Marshal for Target Archery
      http://eliw.com/ - http://archery.atlantia.sca.org/
    • Conal O'hAirt Jim Hart
      ... If I m understanding the place it broke.... ... xxxxxxx---------- ... My father taught me a trick that he used in the reserves... Take a 1/4 bolt like a
      Message 2 of 18 , Jul 11, 2005
        >
        > What finally broke was one of the laps 'split off'
        > down the length of
        > the ridge (diagonally though) ... given they were
        > only 3/4" thick.
        > Of course, it happened when I 'dropped' the pole
        > *sigh*

        If I'm understanding the place it broke....

        ---------------------
        xxxxxxx----------
        -----------


        My father taught me a trick that he used
        in the reserves...

        Take a 1/4" bolt like a long rivet and put it
        through the board just before the lap. Get one
        long enough to cutt off the threads and peen the
        end over a washer like a rivet. It will add lots
        of strenght to it.

        the 'I' is the bolt.....

        -------I----------- --I-------
        I --------- -------- I
        -------I-- ----------I-------





        Baron Conal O'hAirt / Jim Hart

        Aude Aliquid Dignum
        ' Dare Something Worthy '



        __________________________________
        Yahoo! Mail
        Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour:
        http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html
      • James Winkler
        That would take real brass ... ;-S [Hey... looks good from 10 feet or so!!!!] Chas. [shiny brass is always ... As long as you do not go back to buying gold
        Message 3 of 18 , Jul 11, 2005
          That would take 'real brass'... ;-S   [Hey... looks good from 10 feet or so!!!!]
          Chas.
           

          \[shiny brass is always
          > nice]...

          As long as you do not go back to buying
          gold spray paint by the case Charles....



          Baron Conal O'hAirt / Jim Hart

             Aude Aliquid Dignum
               ' Dare Something Worthy '

        • ewdysar
          I believe that I have seen examples of the Norm joint in the Gamble House in Pasadena, a historical Greene and Greene Craftsman mansion. The house also
          Message 4 of 18 , Jul 12, 2005
            I believe that I have seen examples of the "Norm" joint in the
            Gamble House in Pasadena, a historical Greene and Greene Craftsman
            mansion. The house also contains examples of the scarf joints
            shown. The Norm joint was used in various spots in the interior,
            with exotic woods and master quality detail. The scarf joints were
            in the roof structure along with other timber frame joints, more
            structural than show.

            Eric, aka Eirikr

            --- In medievalsawdust@yahoogroups.com, Siegfried
            <SiegfriedFaust@g...> wrote:
            > Ok, so last year my ridge pole busted at Pennsic, and I managed to
            > screw & glue it together to allow it to work ...
            > In particular, I was impressed a while back while watching This Old
            > House reruns, at watching Norm make a 'Interlocking Scarf Joint'
            (or
            > something similarly called). In that it was a joint that
            disassembled
            > easily, and just 'held itself together'. No bolts, no nothing.
            > Really dern impressive and guaranteed to impress people, who
            looking
            > at it think that there is no way it will hold together, but it
            does.
            >
            > Ok, here is my question though. I've done some research, and
            while
            > 'real details' are hard to find, I'm debating between 2 different
            > joints. And I'd like some advice.
            >
            > The first is the 'Norm' joint ... pardon the bad ASCII art (go
            render
            > this in a monospace font), but it looks like this:
            > ___________________________________
            > /
            > ---[]---[]---[]---
            > _______________________/___________
            >
            > In this join, the [] areas hold wood blocks, that are meant to
            slide
            > in easily. No need to be 'tight'. Once all 3 are in, any attempt
            at
            > movement by the joint binds them all up.
            >
            > Second is a Splayed Hooked Wedged Scarf Joint, that I found via
            > searching online at Timber Framing sites ... A decent picture of
            this
            > can be seen here sans it's wedges:
            > http://www.trilliumdell.com/vocabulary/img/scarf_joint.jpg
            >
            > Also here is bad ASCII art as well:
            > _____________________________________
            > __\
            > __..--''
            > __..-[]-''
            > __..--''
            > _____\_______________________________
            >
            > Here, the single hole [] (it's supposed to be tipped ... check that
            > image I sent) ... instead is meant to take 2 wedges to be driven
            > against each other, to push the joint tight and keep it tight.
            >
            > So, now, the questions:
            >
            > A) Any reason any of you can see to do one, versus the other?
            Besides
            > the fact that the bottom one seems to be quite common in timber
            > framing, whereas I can't see any references to the Norm joint
            anywhere
            > ... except the show where he made it in an arbor, and the show
            where
            > he 'discovered it', used in building a house.
            >
            > B) Followup....
            > Thanks,
            > Sorry for the long email,
            > Siegfried
            >
          • Chris Larsson (Hrelgar)
            I ve been pondering this all day. On the surface it would seem to me that the norm joint would perform better with downward pressure (assuming beam is
            Message 5 of 18 , Jul 12, 2005
              I've been pondering this all day. On the surface it would seem to me
              that the norm joint would perform better with downward pressure
              (assuming beam is horizontal) Since there's more wood available (half
              of the beam) in the hook portion of the joint.

              But then I noticed that the block in the timber frame joint is
              actually a wedge and is canted. During the assembly the wedge is
              hammered in, driving the pieces together, and would result in a
              tighter joint. Norm's relies on well cut, matching surfaces.

              Also, I'd speculate that the timber frame joint may make assembly
              easier. Remember, this would be used on large beams. So the beams
              could be hoisted into place, and supported by an upright from below
              and hooked together (where the wedge will be eventually driven in).
              Then the uprights (which presumably this is being used to bridge
              between), can be drawn together (via ropes/pulleys or whatever) and
              the joint would be drawn together, sliding along the canted portion of
              the joint. Then finally the wedge would be hammered in to hold in place.

              I have no timber frame experience, so my description is pure conjecture.

              So, I'd guess that Norm's joint might actually be better for your
              application, since there'd be more wood available to support the joint
              with downward force. I was thinking that one could actually make the
              blocks be wedge shaped parallelograms (i.e. a rectangle on one end and
              a parallelogram on the other) which would force the 2 beams closer
              together during assembly.

              I was also thinking that you could wrap the hooked portion of the
              joint tightly with cord rather than metal. Just an alternative that
              would accomplish the same thing.

              Chris

              > > A) Any reason any of you can see to do one, versus the other?
              > Besides
              > > the fact that the bottom one seems to be quite common in timber
              > > framing, whereas I can't see any references to the Norm joint
              > anywhere
              > > ... except the show where he made it in an arbor, and the show
              > where
              > > he 'discovered it', used in building a house.
              > >
            • Bill McNutt
              It s been my experience that butt joints and scotch tape will work in calm weather. It s when the wind starts to pick up that things get exciting. Neither of
              Message 6 of 18 , Jul 13, 2005
                It's been my experience that butt joints and scotch tape will work in calm
                weather. It's when the wind starts to pick up that things get exciting.
                Neither of these joints do if for me when I think of pitching my pavilion at
                the Lilies War, where occasional gusts of 30 mph are thought of as "breezy."
                How are these things going to hold up with the side-ways forces that pop
                back and forth?

                Master Will
                http://tech.cls.utk.edu/wood


                -----Original Message-----
                From: medievalsawdust@yahoogroups.com
                [mailto:medievalsawdust@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Chris Larsson
                (Hrelgar)
                Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 6:36 PM
                To: medievalsawdust@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: [MedievalSawdust] Re: Pavilion Poles & Timber-framing Scarf Joints

                I've been pondering this all day. On the surface it would seem to me
                that the norm joint would perform better with downward pressure
                (assuming beam is horizontal) Since there's more wood available (half
                of the beam) in the hook portion of the joint.

                But then I noticed that the block in the timber frame joint is
                actually a wedge and is canted. During the assembly the wedge is
                hammered in, driving the pieces together, and would result in a
                tighter joint. Norm's relies on well cut, matching surfaces.

                Also, I'd speculate that the timber frame joint may make assembly
                easier. Remember, this would be used on large beams. So the beams
                could be hoisted into place, and supported by an upright from below
                and hooked together (where the wedge will be eventually driven in).
                Then the uprights (which presumably this is being used to bridge
                between), can be drawn together (via ropes/pulleys or whatever) and
                the joint would be drawn together, sliding along the canted portion of
                the joint. Then finally the wedge would be hammered in to hold in place.

                I have no timber frame experience, so my description is pure conjecture.

                So, I'd guess that Norm's joint might actually be better for your
                application, since there'd be more wood available to support the joint
                with downward force. I was thinking that one could actually make the
                blocks be wedge shaped parallelograms (i.e. a rectangle on one end and
                a parallelogram on the other) which would force the 2 beams closer
                together during assembly.

                I was also thinking that you could wrap the hooked portion of the
                joint tightly with cord rather than metal. Just an alternative that
                would accomplish the same thing.

                Chris

                > > A) Any reason any of you can see to do one, versus the other?
                > Besides
                > > the fact that the bottom one seems to be quite common in timber
                > > framing, whereas I can't see any references to the Norm joint
                > anywhere
                > > ... except the show where he made it in an arbor, and the show
                > where
                > > he 'discovered it', used in building a house.
                > >





                Yahoo! Groups Links
              • Siegfried
                Ahh, yes, that s it. The Gamble house. It was an episode where Norm visited the Gamble house and saw the joint there. Then he in a later episode made
                Message 7 of 18 , Jul 13, 2005
                  Ahh, yes, that's it. The Gamble house. It was an episode where Norm
                  visited the Gamble house and saw the joint there. Then he in a later
                  episode made gazebo/type thing, using that joint to hook long cross
                  pieces together.

                  Thanks, that had been bugging me.

                  Siegfried


                  On 7/12/05, ewdysar <ewdysar@...> wrote:
                  > I believe that I have seen examples of the "Norm" joint in the
                  > Gamble House in Pasadena, a historical Greene and Greene Craftsman
                  > mansion. The house also contains examples of the scarf joints
                  > shown. The Norm joint was used in various spots in the interior,
                  > with exotic woods and master quality detail. The scarf joints were
                  > in the roof structure along with other timber frame joints, more
                  > structural than show.
                  >
                  > Eric, aka Eirikr
                  >
                  > --- In medievalsawdust@yahoogroups.com, Siegfried
                  > <SiegfriedFaust@g...> wrote:
                  > > Ok, so last year my ridge pole busted at Pennsic, and I managed to
                  > > screw & glue it together to allow it to work ...
                  > > In particular, I was impressed a while back while watching This Old
                  > > House reruns, at watching Norm make a 'Interlocking Scarf Joint'
                  > (or
                  > > something similarly called). In that it was a joint that
                  > disassembled
                  > > easily, and just 'held itself together'. No bolts, no nothing.
                  > > Really dern impressive and guaranteed to impress people, who
                  > looking
                  > > at it think that there is no way it will hold together, but it
                  > does.
                  > >
                  > > Ok, here is my question though. I've done some research, and
                  > while
                  > > 'real details' are hard to find, I'm debating between 2 different
                  > > joints. And I'd like some advice.
                  > >
                  > > The first is the 'Norm' joint ... pardon the bad ASCII art (go
                  > render
                  > > this in a monospace font), but it looks like this:
                  > > ___________________________________
                  > > /
                  > > ---[]---[]---[]---
                  > > _______________________/___________
                  > >
                  > > In this join, the [] areas hold wood blocks, that are meant to
                  > slide
                  > > in easily. No need to be 'tight'. Once all 3 are in, any attempt
                  > at
                  > > movement by the joint binds them all up.
                  > >
                  > > Second is a Splayed Hooked Wedged Scarf Joint, that I found via
                  > > searching online at Timber Framing sites ... A decent picture of
                  > this
                  > > can be seen here sans it's wedges:
                  > > http://www.trilliumdell.com/vocabulary/img/scarf_joint.jpg
                  > >
                  > > Also here is bad ASCII art as well:
                  > > _____________________________________
                  > > __\
                  > > __..--''
                  > > __..-[]-''
                  > > __..--''
                  > > _____\_______________________________
                  > >
                  > > Here, the single hole [] (it's supposed to be tipped ... check that
                  > > image I sent) ... instead is meant to take 2 wedges to be driven
                  > > against each other, to push the joint tight and keep it tight.
                  > >
                  > > So, now, the questions:
                  > >
                  > > A) Any reason any of you can see to do one, versus the other?
                  > Besides
                  > > the fact that the bottom one seems to be quite common in timber
                  > > framing, whereas I can't see any references to the Norm joint
                  > anywhere
                  > > ... except the show where he made it in an arbor, and the show
                  > where
                  > > he 'discovered it', used in building a house.
                  > >
                  > > B) Followup....
                  > > Thanks,
                  > > Sorry for the long email,
                  > > Siegfried
                  > >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >


                  --
                  _________________________________________________________________________
                  THL Siegfried Sebastian Faust - http://crossbows.biz/
                  Barony of Highland Foorde - Baronial Archery Marshal
                  Kingdom of Atlantia - Deputy Kingdom Earl Marshal for Target Archery
                  http://eliw.com/ - http://archery.atlantia.sca.org/
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.