Posted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 12:24 pm
Never saw Norm use that technique.heathicus wrote:Are you going to paint the crown molding afterward? If so, just use some caulk to fill in the gaps. .......
(cheater!!) (cheater!!)Shopsmith Forums
A woodworking forum for woodworking hobbyist and woodworking projects related and unrelated to the Shopsmith MARK V
https://forum.shopsmith.com/
Potpourri starting Feb 22, 2010
Page 10 of 11
(cheater!!)Posted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 1:29 pm
iclark wrote:it is a parsing problem.
try it as:
Do not hold it by anything other than the_as_yet_unfolded_portions.
in other words, do hold it by the part that is still folded.
if it is completely unfolded (that is "fully extended"), then "never mind" as there is no folded part to hold it by.
and, yes, they are very easily broken if the grain is not very straight in the wooden parts. you find out about the cross-grain sections when they break.
Ivan
ps: getting the punctuation right for nested quotes is a pill. reminds me that: "If it has syntax, it is not user frindly.":rolleyes:
In other words, we said the same thing. The purpose of a qualifying/disqualifying parenthetical is to preclude the necessity of an additional sentence! Yes they sometimes lead to confusion by the recipient.
p.s. It ain't friendly either!:D
Posted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 1:35 pm
mickyd wrote:Is plywood thickness always shy by 1/32" regardless of nominal size?
Recently yes.
Sorta like the 2x4 that used to be 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 are now 1 1/2 x 3 1/2.Me thinks it is absurd to be shy by 1/32". They were = to nominal(+- shrinkage/expansion due to moisture variations[very small variations]) for many decades. Why are they 'sub nominal' now?
Any body seen AB grade lately?
Posted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 2:44 pm
Straight router bits are 'oversized' as compared to the plywood thicknesses. A 1/2" straight router bit gives a loose fit for 1/2" (now 15/32"!!!) plywood. Cabinetmakers aren't screaming???JPG40504 wrote:Recently yes.
Me thinks it is absurd to be shy by 1/32". They were = to nominal(+- shrinkage/expansion due to moisture variations[very small variations]) for many decades. Why are they 'sub nominal' now?
Any body seen AB grade lately?
Posted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 2:53 pm
Cabinet makers use 'plywood'?mickyd wrote:Straight router bits are 'oversized' as compared to the plywood thicknesses. A 1/2" straight router bit gives a loose fit for 1/2" (now 15/32"!!!) plywood. Cabinetmakers aren't screaming???
Posted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 2:58 pm
With veneering, who would know? You get away with what you can!!JPG40504 wrote:Cabinet makers use 'plywood'?
Posted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 3:02 pm
Veneering also works well on mdf and 'particle board'.mickyd wrote:With veneering, who would know? You get away with what you can!!
Posted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:17 pm
Well, they do make undersized bits that fit current plywood thicknesses.mickyd wrote:Straight router bits are 'oversized' as compared to the plywood thicknesses. A 1/2" straight router bit gives a loose fit for 1/2" (now 15/32"!!!) plywood. Cabinetmakers aren't screaming???
http://www.rockler.com/product.cfm?page=2115
Also, you could use a standard sized router bit that is undersized and make two passes.
Or, cut an undersized dado, then a rabbet (or "rebate"
) on the edge of the plywood so it will fit the dado.Posted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:47 pm
well, I was doing my best to repeat what you said.JPG40504 wrote:In other words, we said the same thing. The purpose of a qualifying/disqualifying parenthetical is to preclude the necessity of an additional sentence! Yes they sometimes lead to confusion by the recipient.
p.s. It ain't friendly either!:D
and, yeah, it has been fiendishly difficult for me to be sure that I hit all of the friendly keys lately.
Deep subject matter
Posted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:37 pm
iclark wrote:well, I was doing my best to repeat what you said.
and, yeah, it has been fiendishly difficult for me to be sure that I hit all of the friendly keys lately.
And you Did do it well!;)