It is currently 29 Mar 2024, 12:12
Cabinetman wrote:"This produces a raised and field panel, and I'd prefer just a raised panel."
You’ve got me wondering there Mike, I always thought the field was the flat area in the centre of the panel and the 90°Rebate/ step up to it is the raised bit, compared to just a slope which meets the flat area so no "raising". Quite willing to accept that I’ve been wrong all this time, or is it one of those, depends where you come from things. Tim time to get your book out again lol
Trevanion wrote:So, hijacking Mike's thread... Here's what some authors said about raised panels.....
Mike G wrote:
I noticed in the video Andy posted that the tongue Roy Underhill made was just a continuation of the slope of the slopy part he planed and chiselled into shape, rather than making any attempt to flatten out into a tongue. In other words, his panel wedges into the grooves in the frame, rather than slots in. That's far easier to make, but far easier to get wrong (too loose in the grooves).
PAC1 wrote:I agree with Andy T. I might have been to subtle in my earlier comment. The machined panel is well just that a machined panel with crisp edges.
Mike G wrote:Brilliant, Andy, thanks. When I next visit Bristol, I hope I can persuade you to take me around the Red Lodge.
AJB Temple wrote:.....Matched sets seem to be a fairly modern phenomenon and seem to be uncommon prior to the 18th Century.....
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests