Thread: Timber sizes
View Single Post
  #9   Report Post  
Posted to rec.woodworking
Larry Jaques[_2_] Larry Jaques[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,624
Default Timber sizes

On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 11:22:12 -0600, the infamous basilisk
scrawled the following:

On 02/27/2010 10:34 PM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 09:17:02 -0600, the infamous "basilisk"
scrawled the following:

American lumber standards has changed the dressed sizes
of timbers larger 7 inches to be 3/4's inch smaller than
nominal size.

8x8's that used to be dressed to 7.5x7.5 inches will
now be 7.25x7.25.

Just passing this along.

http://www.alsc.org/greenbook%20collection/ps20.pdf


That document is PS 20-05, as in 2005 printing date. There is no
change _today_ to the (diminishing) size of dimensional lumber as we
know it.

The grading agencies operating
under ALSC are just now pushing this into the mills.

I have no idea why it has taken 5 years to reach the mill level,
but I will give Timber Products Inspection(agency I work under)
a call Monday and try to find out what the process is.


Where are you based, b?


I "think" these changes come from NIST and are passed to ALSC and
then to the grading agencies for comments and gripes all along
the chain of production and regulation, quasi govt. beauracracy
at it finest.


Two things bother me. First, I haven't seen any recent changes in
lumber sizing. Second, you say grading agencies are just now pushing
it into the mills, but the old document is produced only to reflect
what's hitting the streets from the mills under voluntary agreement.

I'm missing something, so please tell me what you're saying here.
I first read it as a caveat to us that things were about to change,
but I then checked the copyright date.

Me's puzzled.

--
Pessimist: One who, when he has the choice of two evils, chooses both.
--Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)