Page 1 of 2
Difference in x-notching
Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 6:45 pm
by Dave Bagwill
I was looking at two sets of plans I'd bought long ago from Georgia Luthier Supply. A 000 set and a 00 set.
The x joint in the 000 is what we most often use and see - each brace notched and then glued as half-laps, basically.
But when I blew up to picture of the 00 x-braces, I saw this - and would like your comments. (A close-up and a larger view attached)
Re: Difference in x-notching
Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 7:28 pm
by John Parchem
Interesting, maybe he thought the bracing was a bit stiff.
Re: Difference in x-notching
Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 7:55 pm
by Dave Bagwill
Maybe so, hadn't thought of that.
Reading more closely on a different page of the plans, though, I just spotted this: (Coping one of the braces?)
(I just emailed the pictures to the drawer of the plans and asked the question about half-lap vs coping and tongue/groove)
Re: Difference in x-notching
Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2017 4:06 pm
by Dave Bagwill
I have not heard back from the drawer of the plans.
But I do notice a number of you have viewed the thread - any other ideas about that x-joint? Does it look strong enough?
Re: Difference in x-notching
Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2017 5:01 pm
by ken cierp
In my view that is an idea doomed to fail. The intersection is supposed to be able to distribute the rocking load equally. Beside a normal X configuration does have TG construction, so that coping makes a weaker joint since there is no load resistance on the top half of the coped brace.
Re: Difference in x-notching
Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2017 6:54 pm
by Dave Bagwill
Thanks Ken, that makes sense to me.
Though I've never been the same since seeing this R. Taylor scheme:
Re: Difference in x-notching
Posted: Thu Mar 02, 2017 12:09 pm
by ken cierp
As I see it -- the coped feature in the example pictured, with all the torque and flexing that goes on in that area seems placing the weakest point at that location presents a prime spot for a split, of course I could be all wet.