|
|
|
|
Maximum rip width for 3/4" red oak
(heyscott) wrote in message . com...
My question is whether this is good advice. Do I really need to rip
all my wood down like this, or can I join two 6" pieces if I want to?
What's your timber like ? What are you most worried about, movement as
shrinkage, or as warping ?
If your timber is from a small log (or near the centre), then there's
an appreciable amount of curvature inside the board (just look at the
end). It's quite possible that 4" boards from a narrow coppiced log
will be much less stable against cupping than an 8" board from a wide
log. Is this quarter sawn or flat sawn ? If it's quarter sawn then
you can pretty much ignore warping in anything under 12" - although
you still need to worry about linear shrinkage.
You may even find that a 12" board with the pith central is _more_
stable as two 6" boards than as three 4" boards. For the centres of
large flat-sawn boards, the cupping is much worse in the middle than
towards the sides. Either losing the middle strip, or at least getting
it to the side of a ripped strip, is better cupping-wise than leaving
it plonk in the centre of your most visible board.
If it's "typical" well-dried timber from a decent sized log, then 6"
wouldn't worry me. I'll happily go to about 8" for built-in furniture
without any real concerns. For small case pieces, or things with
tight-fitting doors, then I'd regard 6" as tops. Of course, YMMV and
it all depends on the board you have.
If you care about this stuff, and you want to learn to be able to
predict it (which is a task to learn, but it's not rocket science)
then get yourself either (or both) Hoadley's book "Understanding Wood"
or the US Forest Products handbook (downloadable, or Lee Valley sell a
nice printed version)
|