Was watching a prerecorded episode of Woodsmith tonight.
The man was cutting deep 3/4" wide dados using a sled and the rip fence
at the same time (the blade was 6" from the fence), in 3 passes.

Is kickback not a problem here because the height of the blade is less
than the height of the wood, or is this a safety issue?

Thanks,
Bill

On 12/14/11 11:30 PM, Bill wrote:

Was watching a prerecorded episode of Woodsmith tonight.
The man was cutting deep 3/4" wide dados using a sled and the rip fence
at the same time (the blade was 6" from the fence), in 3 passes.

Is kickback not a problem here because the height of the blade is less
than the height of the wood, or is this a safety issue?

Thanks,
Bill

1. There will be no cut-off piece to bind between the blade and fence.
2. The piece is being held (presumable) against the sled fence.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

-MIKE- wrote:
On 12/14/11 11:30 PM, Bill wrote:

Was watching a prerecorded episode of Woodsmith tonight.
The man was cutting deep 3/4" wide dados using a sled and the rip fence
at the same time (the blade was 6" from the fence), in 3 passes.

Is kickback not a problem here because the height of the blade is less
than the height of the wood, or is this a safety issue?

Thanks,
Bill

1. There will be no cut-off piece to bind between the blade and fence.
2. The piece is being held (presumable) against the sled fence.


I see. As long as you hold it snug (or use a clamp), it should be okay.

I guess if the end of the work binds against the fence, one better duck!

Thank you!

On 12/15/2011 1:25 AM, Bill wrote:
-MIKE- wrote:
On 12/14/11 11:30 PM, Bill wrote:
....
The man was cutting deep 3/4" wide dados using a sled and the rip fence
at the same time (the blade was 6" from the fence), in 3 passes.

Is kickback not a problem here because the height of the blade is less
than the height of the wood, or is this a safety issue?
....
1. There will be no cut-off piece to bind between the blade and fence.
2. The piece is being held (presumable) against the sled fence.


I see. As long as you hold it snug (or use a clamp), it should be okay.
....

The other point is that since there's no cut through there's no
possibility of the kerf closing behind the blade.

--

dpb wrote:
On 12/15/2011 1:25 AM, Bill wrote:
-MIKE- wrote:
On 12/14/11 11:30 PM, Bill wrote:
...
The man was cutting deep 3/4" wide dados using a sled and the rip fence
at the same time (the blade was 6" from the fence), in 3 passes.

Is kickback not a problem here because the height of the blade is less
than the height of the wood, or is this a safety issue?
...
1. There will be no cut-off piece to bind between the blade and fence.
2. The piece is being held (presumable) against the sled fence.


I see. As long as you hold it snug (or use a clamp), it should be okay.
...

The other point is that since there's no cut through there's no
possibility of the kerf closing behind the blade.

dpb, I didn't think of that. Good point. Thank you! -Bill

On 12/15/11 1:25 AM, Bill wrote:
-MIKE- wrote:
On 12/14/11 11:30 PM, Bill wrote:

Was watching a prerecorded episode of Woodsmith tonight.
The man was cutting deep 3/4" wide dados using a sled and the rip fence
at the same time (the blade was 6" from the fence), in 3 passes.

Is kickback not a problem here because the height of the blade is less
than the height of the wood, or is this a safety issue?

Thanks,
Bill

1. There will be no cut-off piece to bind between the blade and fence.
2. The piece is being held (presumable) against the sled fence.


I see. As long as you hold it snug (or use a clamp), it should be okay.

I guess if the end of the work binds against the fence, one better duck!

Thank you!


No, snug really has nothing to do with it, although snug is always a
good idea.
What makes kickback a virtual impossibility in the case is that there is
no lose piece on the rip-fence side of the blade. Also, as another
pointed out, there is no chance of binding on the forward side of the
blade.

I was pointing out, in reference to using a sled, that since there is a
fence on the sled to keep the "cut-off" side from backing away from the
blade, there is no chance of it twisting between the blade and rip-fence
which is a main cause of kickback.

In the case of cutting a dado on a table saw without a sled, it would be
perfectly safe to do so with a miter gauge (with or without an extended
miter fence). Again, there will be no cutoff piece to bind between the
blase and rip-fence.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 00:30:32 -0500, Bill wrote:


Was watching a prerecorded episode of Woodsmith tonight.
The man was cutting deep 3/4" wide dados using a sled and the rip fence
at the same time (the blade was 6" from the fence), in 3 passes.

Is kickback not a problem here because the height of the blade is less
than the height of the wood, or is this a safety issue?

Thanks,
Bill

Two schools of thought here. One is that if you aren't cutting through
the wood, you won't get kickback because the wood won't close in
behind the blade. Which is true.

But you still have a possible source of kickback, which is that if
your work somehow gets hung up against the fence, it can twist againt
the blade and you can still get kickback. Not as likely, but still can
happen. I wouldn't do the sled + fence move because there are other
ways to get the job done.

"-MIKE-" wrote in message
...
On 12/15/11 1:25 AM, Bill wrote:
-MIKE- wrote:
On 12/14/11 11:30 PM, Bill wrote:

Was watching a prerecorded episode of Woodsmith tonight.
The man was cutting deep 3/4" wide dados using a sled and the rip fence
at the same time (the blade was 6" from the fence), in 3 passes.

Is kickback not a problem here because the height of the blade is less
than the height of the wood, or is this a safety issue?

Thanks,
Bill

1. There will be no cut-off piece to bind between the blade and fence.
2. The piece is being held (presumable) against the sled fence.


I see. As long as you hold it snug (or use a clamp), it should be okay.

I guess if the end of the work binds against the fence, one better duck!


Thank you!


No, snug really has nothing to do with it, although snug is always a
good idea.
What makes kickback a virtual impossibility in the case is that there is
no lose piece on the rip-fence side of the blade. Also, as another
pointed out, there is no chance of binding on the forward side of the
blade.

I was pointing out, in reference to using a sled, that since there is a
fence on the sled to keep the "cut-off" side from backing away from the
blade, there is no chance of it twisting between the blade and rip-fence
which is a main cause of kickback.

In the case of cutting a dado on a table saw without a sled, it would be
perfectly safe to do so with a miter gauge (with or without an extended
miter fence). Again, there will be no cutoff piece to bind between the
blase and rip-fence.


--

-MIKE-



No lose piece? Where's Larry.

On 12/15/2011 3:07 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
On 12/15/11 1:25 AM, Bill wrote:
-MIKE- wrote:
On 12/14/11 11:30 PM, Bill wrote:

Was watching a prerecorded episode of Woodsmith tonight.
The man was cutting deep 3/4" wide dados using a sled and the rip fence
at the same time (the blade was 6" from the fence), in 3 passes.

Is kickback not a problem here because the height of the blade is less
than the height of the wood, or is this a safety issue?

Thanks,
Bill

1. There will be no cut-off piece to bind between the blade and fence.
2. The piece is being held (presumable) against the sled fence.


I see. As long as you hold it snug (or use a clamp), it should be okay.

I guess if the end of the work binds against the fence, one better
duck!

Thank you!


No, snug really has nothing to do with it, although snug is always a
good idea.
What makes kickback a virtual impossibility in the case is that there is
no lose piece on the rip-fence side of the blade. Also, as another
pointed out, there is no chance of binding on the forward side of the
blade.

I was pointing out, in reference to using a sled, that since there is a
fence on the sled to keep the "cut-off" side from backing away from the
blade, there is no chance of it twisting between the blade and rip-fence
which is a main cause of kickback.

In the case of cutting a dado on a table saw without a sled, it would be
perfectly safe to do so with a miter gauge (with or without an extended
miter fence). Again, there will be no cutoff piece to bind between the
blase and rip-fence.



Be careful with the suggestion that this is safe. Every thing has to be
done correctly to prevent kick back.

If you pull the sled and work back through the blade and you let the
work move at all a kick back is going to happen unless you continue to
hold the work piece firmly in place.
Kick back does not require a loose piece between the blade and fence, it
merely requires for the blade to catch the wood and throw it back.

On Dec 15, 12:30*am, Bill wrote:
Was watching a prerecorded episode of Woodsmith tonight.
The man was cutting deep 3/4" wide dados using a sled and the rip fence
at the same time (the blade was 6" from the fence), in 3 passes.

Is kickback not a problem here because the height of the blade is less
than the height of the wood, or is this a safety issue?

Thanks,
Bill

1" offset block does wonders to ease your mind with
cuts like this.

Father Haskell wrote:
On Dec 15, 12:30 am, wrote:
Was watching a prerecorded episode of Woodsmith tonight.
The man was cutting deep 3/4" wide dados using a sled and the rip fence
at the same time (the blade was 6" from the fence), in 3 passes.

Is kickback not a problem here because the height of the blade is less
than the height of the wood, or is this a safety issue?

Thanks,
Bill

1" offset block does wonders to ease your mind with
cuts like this.

Yep, there it is (IMHO), the evasive "best idea"!

"Bill" wrote:

Was watching a prerecorded episode of Woodsmith tonight.
----------------------
What episode #?

Lew

Lew Hodgett wrote:
"Bill" wrote:

Was watching a prerecorded episode of Woodsmith tonight.
----------------------
What episode #?

Lew



Lew,

Woodsmith: "Through Mortise & Tenon Projects" (2011)
That's what I get from my DVR, I don't know the episode #.

Bill

On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 21:08:52 -0700, "Max"
wrote:

"-MIKE-" wrote in message
...
On 12/15/11 1:25 AM, Bill wrote:
-MIKE- wrote:
On 12/14/11 11:30 PM, Bill wrote:

Was watching a prerecorded episode of Woodsmith tonight.
The man was cutting deep 3/4" wide dados using a sled and the rip fence
at the same time (the blade was 6" from the fence), in 3 passes.

Is kickback not a problem here because the height of the blade is less
than the height of the wood, or is this a safety issue?

Thanks,
Bill

1. There will be no cut-off piece to bind between the blade and fence.
2. The piece is being held (presumable) against the sled fence.


I see. As long as you hold it snug (or use a clamp), it should be okay.

I guess if the end of the work binds against the fence, one better duck!


Thank you!


No, snug really has nothing to do with it, although snug is always a
good idea.
What makes kickback a virtual impossibility in the case is that there is
no lose piece on the rip-fence side of the blade. Also, as another
pointed out, there is no chance of binding on the forward side of the
blade.
-MIKE-

No lose piece? Where's Larry.

Hold one. Got the elevation, setting his azimuth...

OK, FIRE FOR EFFECT!

--
Silence is more musical than any song.
-- Christina Rossetti

Bill wrote:
Lew Hodgett wrote:
"Bill" wrote:

Was watching a prerecorded episode of Woodsmith tonight.
----------------------
What episode #?

Lew



Lew,

Woodsmith: "Through Mortise & Tenon Projects" (2011)
That's what I get from my DVR, I don't know the episode #.

Bill

If anyone else has seen the episode, maybe we can offer opinions on the
strategy used of making a mortise by cutting a dado into the edge of
each of two pieces of wood and then glueing these edges together. Maybe
one can argue that the glue is stronger than the wood, but my intuition
tells me that one is inviting the glue joint to fail.

Bill

On Dec 16, 2:17*am, "Lew Hodgett" wrote:
"Bill" wrote:
Was watching a prerecorded episode of Woodsmith tonight.

----------------------
What episode #?

Lew

Could it be this one, making it Episode 507:

WOODSMITH SHOP
Through Mortise & Tenon Projects
Aired 11/9/2011 @ 12:00 PM

Special weekend projects, a Nantucket-style bench and a traditional
wall shelf, are presented.

Episode: 507 Through Mortise & Tenon Projects
Program Length: 26 Minutes 46 Seconds
Educational Recording Rights: One-year rights for teachers to tape.

On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:39:01 -0500, Bill wrote:

snip


If anyone else has seen the episode, maybe we can offer opinions on the
strategy used of making a mortise by cutting a dado into the edge of
each of two pieces of wood and then glueing these edges together. Maybe
one can argue that the glue is stronger than the wood, but my intuition
tells me that one is inviting the glue joint to fail.

Bill

Cutting dado's increases the mating surface areas.
--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA

DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Dec 16, 2:17 am, "Lew wrote:
"Bill" wrote:
Was watching a prerecorded episode of Woodsmith tonight.

----------------------
What episode #?

Lew

Could it be this one, making it Episode 507:

WOODSMITH SHOP
Through Mortise& Tenon Projects
Aired 11/9/2011 @ 12:00 PM

Special weekend projects, a Nantucket-style bench and a traditional
wall shelf, are presented.

Episode: 507 Through Mortise& Tenon Projects
Program Length: 26 Minutes 46 Seconds
Educational Recording Rights: One-year rights for teachers to tape.


Yes, that's the one. The sawing discussed here occurs early, the first
time they go to the TS.

Nova wrote:
On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:39:01 -0500, wrote:

snip


If anyone else has seen the episode, maybe we can offer opinions on the
strategy used of making a mortise by cutting a dado into the edge of
each of two pieces of wood and then glueing these edges together. Maybe
one can argue that the glue is stronger than the wood, but my intuition
tells me that one is inviting the glue joint to fail.

Bill

Cutting dado's increases the mating surface areas.

That's a good point I had certainly not considered.

On Fri, Nova wrote:
On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:39:01 -0500, wrote:

snip


If anyone else has seen the episode, maybe we can offer opinions on the
strategy used of making a mortise by cutting a dado into the edge of
each of two pieces of wood and then glueing these edges together. Maybe
one can argue that the glue is stronger than the wood, but my intuition
tells me that one is inviting the glue joint to fail.

Bill

Cutting dado's increases the mating surface areas.

More than mortise surface area? _Cute_ trick, mon.

--
Silence is more musical than any song.
-- Christina Rossetti

"Bill" wrote in message ...

Bill wrote:
Lew Hodgett wrote:
"Bill" wrote:

Was watching a prerecorded episode of Woodsmith tonight.
----------------------
What episode #?

Lew



Lew,

Woodsmith: "Through Mortise & Tenon Projects" (2011)
That's what I get from my DVR, I don't know the episode #.

Bill

If anyone else has seen the episode, maybe we can offer opinions on the
strategy used of making a mortise by cutting a dado into the edge of
each of two pieces of wood and then glueing these edges together. Maybe
one can argue that the glue is stronger than the wood, but my intuition
tells me that one is inviting the glue joint to fail.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The glue is stronger than the wood but the joint itself is the weak spot of
the glue up. Stress riser right at the joint.

On Dec 16, 3:18*pm, Nova wrote:
On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:39:01 -0500, Bill wrote:

snip



If anyone else has seen the episode, maybe we can offer opinions on the
strategy used of making a mortise by cutting a dado into the edge of
each of two pieces of wood and then glueing these edges together. *Maybe
one can argue that the glue is stronger than the wood, but my intuition
tells me that one is inviting the glue joint to fail.

Bill

Cutting dado's increases the mating surface areas.
--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA

Not arguing, but also not sure how that relates to the question asked.

If I understand Bill correctly, the technique he described entails
cutting 2 dados and then 'butt joining' the pieces together to form a
mortise.

That does indeed seem to introduce an extra point of failure.

On 12/18/2011 8:25 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Dec 16, 3:18 pm, wrote:
On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:39:01 -0500, wrote:

snip



If anyone else has seen the episode, maybe we can offer opinions on the
strategy used of making a mortise by cutting a dado into the edge of
each of two pieces of wood and then glueing these edges together. Maybe
one can argue that the glue is stronger than the wood, but my intuition
tells me that one is inviting the glue joint to fail.

If I understand Bill correctly, the technique he described entails
cutting 2 dados and then 'butt joining' the pieces together to form a
mortise.

That does indeed seem to introduce an extra point of failure.


The problem is that Bill is ambiguous in his _terminology_ when asking
the question, therefore no answer will be correct until that is determined.

When gluing wood you are basically dealing with faces, edges and end
grain ... the correct answer would depend entirely upon which he was
talking about.

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop

Swingman wrote:
On 12/18/2011 8:25 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Dec 16, 3:18 pm, wrote:
On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:39:01 -0500, wrote:

snip



If anyone else has seen the episode, maybe we can offer opinions on the
strategy used of making a mortise by cutting a dado into the edge of
each of two pieces of wood and then glueing these edges together. Maybe
one can argue that the glue is stronger than the wood, but my intuition
tells me that one is inviting the glue joint to fail.

If I understand Bill correctly, the technique he described entails
cutting 2 dados and then 'butt joining' the pieces together to form a
mortise.

That does indeed seem to introduce an extra point of failure.


The problem is that Bill is ambiguous in his _terminology_ when asking
the question, therefore no answer will be correct until that is determined.

Sorry, Swing. DerbyDad correctly interpreted what I wrote. The only
difference I can tell is that DD used the term "butt joining". --Bill


When gluing wood you are basically dealing with faces, edges and end
grain ... the correct answer would depend entirely upon which he was
talking about.

Swingman wrote:
On 12/18/2011 8:25 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Dec 16, 3:18 pm, wrote:
On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:39:01 -0500, wrote:

snip



If anyone else has seen the episode, maybe we can offer opinions on the
strategy used of making a mortise by cutting a dado into the edge of
each of two pieces of wood and then glueing these edges together. Maybe
one can argue that the glue is stronger than the wood, but my intuition
tells me that one is inviting the glue joint to fail.

If I understand Bill correctly, the technique he described entails
cutting 2 dados and then 'butt joining' the pieces together to form a
mortise.

That does indeed seem to introduce an extra point of failure.


The problem is that Bill is ambiguous in his _terminology_ when asking
the question, therefore no answer will be correct until that is determined.

When gluing wood you are basically dealing with faces, edges and end
grain ... the correct answer would depend entirely upon which he was
talking about.


I think my used of "edges" was correct. I made an effort. To be honest,
I'm hesitant to call what is being cut a dado, but a dado blade is being
used to do the cutting! : )

On 12/16/2011 1:39 PM, Bill wrote:
....

If anyone else has seen the episode, maybe we can offer opinions on the
strategy used of making a mortise by cutting a dado into the edge of
each of two pieces of wood and then glueing these edges together. Maybe
one can argue that the glue is stronger than the wood, but my intuition
tells me that one is inviting the glue joint to fail.
....

That would be a rabbet, not a dado.

As for the technique, what were the dimensions of the stock and what was
the size of the resulting mortise? I've done similar on very large
pieces like make a 2" mortise in a large architectural post by gluing up
three laminations and leaving room for the tenon in the glue-up.
Essentially the same idea on a smaller scale.

A well-fitted long-grain glue joint is at least as strong as the wood in
most cases; the tests show that generally the wood will break along its
grain at some point rather than the glue line failing. The possible
failure could be longevity...

For a beginner I'd presume it was seen as an easier expedient than hand
chopping a mortise assuming the viewer doesn't have access to a mortiser...

--

On 12/18/2011 3:43 PM, Bill wrote:
Swingman wrote:
On 12/18/2011 8:25 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Dec 16, 3:18 pm, wrote:
On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:39:01 -0500, wrote:

snip



If anyone else has seen the episode, maybe we can offer opinions on
the
strategy used of making a mortise by cutting a dado into the edge of
each of two pieces of wood and then glueing these edges together.
Maybe
one can argue that the glue is stronger than the wood, but my
intuition
tells me that one is inviting the glue joint to fail.

If I understand Bill correctly, the technique he described entails
cutting 2 dados and then 'butt joining' the pieces together to form a
mortise.

That does indeed seem to introduce an extra point of failure.


The problem is that Bill is ambiguous in his _terminology_ when asking
the question, therefore no answer will be correct until that is
determined.

Sorry, Swing. DerbyDad correctly interpreted what I wrote. The only
difference I can tell is that DD used the term "butt joining". --Bill


When gluing wood you are basically dealing with faces, edges and end
grain ... the correct answer would depend entirely upon which he was
talking about.

Not always easy to tell from the question whether the poster is using
the correct term to describe the process, which is why I posted what I
did ... when it comes to technical advice, language and terminology are
barriers to both giving competent advice, and the successful execution
thereof.

Most folks, including many woodworkers, would offhandedly also describe
the end grain of the board as an "edge", particularly if the board is
equal to or wider than it is long.

This would certainly result in a complete different answer to the
question about the strength of any glue up involving either one of both
of the parts being wrongly described with that single term ... and
perhaps a radically different result of acting on the advice than expected.

In this case if the glue joint is indeed joining two edges "long grain
to long grain", which if properly done with modern glues would result in
a joint that is more likely to be stronger than the wood itself, you can
see how important it is to be damn certain that is indeed what is being
asked.

IOW, it pays to make damned sure all parties are speaking the same
language before giving advice if you want to put any faith in that
advice.

(I recently went through three meeting with a professional kitchen
designer before it was clearly understood that she had a totally
mistaken notion about what a "face frame cabinet" was ... trust me, it
pays to be AR about terminology in woodworking g)

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop

Swingman wrote:
On 12/18/2011 3:43 PM, Bill wrote:
Swingman wrote:
On 12/18/2011 8:25 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Dec 16, 3:18 pm, wrote:
On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:39:01 -0500, wrote:

snip



If anyone else has seen the episode, maybe we can offer opinions on
the
strategy used of making a mortise by cutting a dado into the edge of
each of two pieces of wood and then glueing these edges together.
Maybe
one can argue that the glue is stronger than the wood, but my
intuition
tells me that one is inviting the glue joint to fail.

If I understand Bill correctly, the technique he described entails
cutting 2 dados and then 'butt joining' the pieces together to form a
mortise.

That does indeed seem to introduce an extra point of failure.


The problem is that Bill is ambiguous in his _terminology_ when asking
the question, therefore no answer will be correct until that is
determined.

Sorry, Swing. DerbyDad correctly interpreted what I wrote. The only
difference I can tell is that DD used the term "butt joining". --Bill


When gluing wood you are basically dealing with faces, edges and end
grain ... the correct answer would depend entirely upon which he was
talking about.

Not always easy to tell from the question whether the poster is using
the correct term to describe the process, which is why I posted what I
did ... when it comes to technical advice, language and terminology are
barriers to both giving competent advice, and the successful execution
thereof.

Most folks, including many woodworkers, would offhandedly also describe
the end grain of the board as an "edge", particularly if the board is
equal to or wider than it is long.

This would certainly result in a complete different answer to the
question about the strength of any glue up involving either one of both
of the parts being wrongly described with that single term ... and
perhaps a radically different result of acting on the advice than expected.

In this case if the glue joint is indeed joining two edges "long grain
to long grain", which if properly done with modern glues would result in
a joint that is more likely to be stronger than the wood itself, you can
see how important it is to be damn certain that is indeed what is being
asked.

IOW, it pays to make damned sure all parties are speaking the same
language before giving advice if you want to put any faith in that
advice.

Yes, your point is well-taken.



(I recently went through three meeting with a professional kitchen
designer before it was clearly understood that she had a totally
mistaken notion about what a "face frame cabinet" was ... trust me, it
pays to be AR about terminology in woodworking g)

I confess that would have confused me too.
After reading at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_frame ,

I now realize by "face frame cabinet" you were probably referring to the
(whole) carcass.

Bill

On 12/18/2011 5:20 PM, Bill wrote:
Swingman wrote:


(I recently went through three meeting with a professional kitchen
designer before it was clearly understood that she had a totally
mistaken notion about what a "face frame cabinet" was ... trust me, it
pays to be AR about terminology in woodworking g)

I confess that would have confused me too.
After reading at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_frame ,

I now realize by "face frame cabinet" you were probably referring to the
(whole) carcass.

Anyone assuming that an individual with a reputation as a _designer to
the stars_ would be versed enough in cabinet terminology to know the
difference would have been bitten in the butt when it comes to
bidding/pricing:

http://kitchensandspaces.com/framed-...less?showall=1


Pays to not assume(.)

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop

Swingman wrote:
On 12/18/2011 5:20 PM, Bill wrote:
Swingman wrote:


(I recently went through three meeting with a professional kitchen
designer before it was clearly understood that she had a totally
mistaken notion about what a "face frame cabinet" was ... trust me, it
pays to be AR about terminology in woodworking g)

I confess that would have confused me too.
After reading at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_frame ,

I now realize by "face frame cabinet" you were probably referring to the
(whole) carcass.

Anyone assuming that an individual with a reputation as a _designer to
the stars_ would be versed enough in cabinet terminology to know the
difference would have been bitten in the butt when it comes to
bidding/pricing:

http://kitchensandspaces.com/framed-...less?showall=1


Pays to not assume(.)


Thanks for the lesson!