My question is simple,

Are these types of joints possible using a standard (or even non
standard) worktop jig ?

I basically have a 45 degree worktop joint in the corner where my
cooker is but the cooker needs to be recessed against the wall and not
inline with the rest of the kitche units.

So the worktop needs to be 135 degrees to the first peice, then the
peice over the cooker needs to be 90 degrees to that making it 45
degrees to the straight peice but slightly recessed. (and the same on
the other side)

Cheers - James

On 27 Jan 2004 09:14:54 -0800, (James Simpson)
wrote:

My question is simple,

It should be, but I am not sure that I am completely clear on what you
want to achieve.

Could you possibly either post it as ASCII art. or sketch, scan and
put on a web site, or some other way to achieve something visual?



Are these types of joints possible using a standard (or even non
standard) worktop jig ?

One main thing that a worktop jig does is to produce an angle for the
postform joint (the curved front). Most jigs will deal with a right
angle or 45 degrees where the resultant angle is 135 degrees.


I basically have a 45 degree worktop joint in the corner where my
cooker is but the cooker needs to be recessed against the wall and not
inline with the rest of the kitche units.


What do you mean by a cooker in this sense? Is this a hob set into
the angled section of worktop?


So the worktop needs to be 135 degrees to the first peice, then the
peice over the cooker needs to be 90 degrees to that making it 45
degrees to the straight peice but slightly recessed. (and the same on
the other side)

Jigs can be quite versatile. I recently used a Screwfix one to help
create a desk for my office. I had a problem that may be the same
or similar to what you describe.

I used a beech block worktop and wanted to create overall an L-shape.
However, in the corner, I wanted space for a large CRT monitor and to
site a keyboard in front of it. The main work area is 600mm deep
and I wanted to create enough depth to accomodate monitor and keyboard
since this used the overall space most efficiently.

So, the overall plan was to use an angled piece of worktop across the
corner and then to put the monitor at the back. However, in order
to achieve the required width, it was necessary to have quite a width
of the angled run of worktop - more than the nominal 600mm.
Because of the geometry, this would result in a space at the back of
the angled piece - simply because of the depth of the worktop.
It works out that there would be a 45 degree triangle missing at the
back. In a kitchen, if this were a peninsula unit or in other
applications, the missing section might not matter, but in my
application I wanted the rear to be completely filled and meeting the
wall.

I achieved this by creating the 45 degree joints using the recommended
method with the jig. All front edges were in line following the
profile of the curved edge. I was also able to cut the recesses for
connecting bolts to hold the sections together. Biscuit joints were
used during final assembly to locate and align the sections.

The rear triangular section was created using the jig to create the
requisite 45 degree angled piece from a straight length of worktop - I
simply didn't use the postform angled piece of the jig. The section
was then biscuit jointed and glued and clamped to the rear of the
angled section.

This is probably not quite what you want to achieve, but jigs can be
versatile on what can be done with a little thought and planning.




Cheers - James

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

Andy Hall wrote in message . ..
On 27 Jan 2004 09:14:54 -0800, (James Simpson)
wrote:

My question is simple,


Could you possibly either post it as ASCII art. or sketch, scan and
put on a web site, or some other way to achieve something visual?


To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

http://imebgo.users.btopenworld.com/

Have a look there for the image - thanks

I think I got the angle wrong, the actual angle taken from the outside
of the worktop is 225. (135 + another 90 ))

Is this actually possible (keeping the rolled edge) or is my best bet
to cut straight into the worktop and join with a straight mitre and
cover the exposed peice with the laminate edging (I would rather try
and keep the rolled edge)

Thanks - James

On 27 Jan 2004 14:13:02 -0800, (James Simpson)
wrote:

Andy Hall wrote in message . ..
On 27 Jan 2004 09:14:54 -0800, (James Simpson)
wrote:

My question is simple,


Could you possibly either post it as ASCII art. or sketch, scan and
put on a web site, or some other way to achieve something visual?


To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

http://imebgo.users.btopenworld.com/

Have a look there for the image - thanks

OK.

I think I got the angle wrong, the actual angle taken from the outside
of the worktop is 225. (135 + another 90 ))

The difference here is that where your triangular pieces meet the
rectangular ones over the units. This is creating an external
angle, which is not normally done. Usually, the section over the
cooker would meet the sections over the units and form an internal 135
degree angle with the postform section. That works and I've done it.
The 90 degree angle between the section over the cooker and the
triangular pieces are also easily done.



Is this actually possible (keeping the rolled edge) or is my best bet
to cut straight into the worktop and join with a straight mitre and
cover the exposed peice with the laminate edging (I would rather try
and keep the rolled edge)

I think it should be with most jigs if you invert them or as a minimum
you could do a simple mitre on the external corner.

However, the whole thing is going to look quite odd and fussy whatever
you do. Why does the cooker have to be set back? Could you bring
it forward, even if it involves a deeper or wider worktop
section......??


Thanks - James




..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

Andy Hall wrote in message . ..
On 27 Jan 2004 14:13:02 -0800, (James Simpson)
wrote:

Andy Hall wrote in message . ..


I think it should be with most jigs if you invert them or as a minimum
you could do a simple mitre on the external corner.

I am tempted with this option )

However, the whole thing is going to look quite odd and fussy whatever
you do. Why does the cooker have to be set back? Could you bring
it forward, even if it involves a deeper or wider worktop
section......??

It will look a bit different but its currently done with tiles and itlooks ok, but I want to get rid of the tiles. I could move the cooker forard but the kitchen is not very big at all and it needs to site back to preserve space! Thanks for your ideas and advice, I may attempt a simple mitre and bolt the worktops together




.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl