Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by logfromblammo 2570 days ago
I enjoyed the linked write-up, and also the "M&T vs dowel" and "M&T vs dowel revisited".

Have you ever used your joint-strength rig to determine the minimum M&T geometry or dowel configuration required to make the joint fail before the surrounding wood fails? It seems to me that if all the joints are stronger than necessary anyway, your tests were really testing the joint, plus the wood (which you tried to control), plus your own assumptions about the equivalency of different joinery techniques, rather than just the joints.

I'd also be interested to see a test of hybrid joints, such as a screw at the end of the joint under compression, and an M&T or dowel at the end of the joint that's under tension. A screw-head won't pull out through the wood, if it's mostly being pushed and sheared rather than pulled. I'm thinking a dowel at 45 degrees on the tension side, and then drive a perpendicular screw into the end grain through the compression side.

Your tests also suggest that, since the joints tended to fail along the glue line, dimpling the tenons, or adding ring-shaped grooves to the dowels--rather than the grooves parallel to the long axis or slightly helical that are typical in pre-cut dowels--would increase the joint strength. The interior surface of the mortise or dowel hole would have to be similarly roughened. Perhaps thread the dowel hole, as if for a larger bolt, and thread the dowel rod, as though for a smaller hole, and let the wood glue bite into both like the threads of a screw?

  << ###wood###         << ###wood###
  << ##########         << #/\#/\#/\#
     ~~~glue~~~     VS     ~~~glue~~~
     ########## >>         /#\/#\/#\/ >>
     ###wood### >>         ###wood### >>
1 comments
MatthiasWandel 2570 days ago
I haven't tested it explicitly, butI consider the magick mortise and tenon (or dowel) ratio to be around 4:1 or 5:1. A tenon longer than that will break off (wood failure), shorter than that, and it will pull out (joint failure). I suppose grooves on the dowel would help the glue a bit, but they also weaken the dowel.
link
logfromblammo 2570 days ago
But your failure analysis showed that the point of failure was not the dowel, or the glue, but the wood near the wood-glue interface. The wood failed at planes parallel to the glue plane, such that the glue was left holding on to little splinters. If the glue did not form a plane, whenever the wood cracked parallel to the glue, those cracks would be misaligned, such that they would not immediately lead to joint failure by forming a shear plane. But it still has to be close enough to a plane that you can make the join in the first place. Grooving or dimpling one of the surfaces would be like nailing the dowel to the hole from the inside of the dowel as the glue dries, or adding o-rings that prevent lateral movement to a piece that requires lateral movement for assembly. The glue spikes/rings would have to shear off, or the wood would have to crack from the outermost extent of the spikes/rings.

Weakening the dowel is okay, since it wasn't the dowel that failed. It's probably more important to rough up the inside of the hole anyway, since the failure photos mostly showed that the glue was still stuck to the dowels, and it was wood from the inside surface of the hole that broke away. And the end-grain in the rail somehow frustrated the cracks better than the grain in the post.

link