Mass Wood working

I received a copy of Canadian Architect magazine in the mail the other day. It came with a special edition on Peter Cardew, recipient of the RAIC Gold Medal 2012. Peter Cardew is a Vancouver Architect who started his practice in 1980. I am reminded of a forum organized by the Craft Council of British Columbia in the late 1980’s or early 1990’s at Emily Carr College of Art. The subject of the forum was collaborations between craftspeople and architects. Peter Cardew was the architect invited to speak on the topic. I will always remember his presentation as confusing and awkward. I could not understand why of all the architects, he had been invited to speak on this topic. Reading this Canadian Architect publication all these years later gives me some ideas. Peter Cardew’s presentation at the CCBC forum consisted of showing slides of his work and making the occasional comment on the quality of work, or craft of some of the tradespersons involving in the production of his buildings. For example, he mentioned the quality of the concrete finishing on one project. Clearly there was a big difference between the craft work in his projects and the concept of collaboration between craftspeople and architects as understood by CCBC and its members. The collaborations that were the subject of the CCBC forum would involve the craftsperson being commissioned to design and produce work to compliment the architect’s design. Some examples might be a glass feature wall, ceramic lighting fixtures, wood furniture, a metal sculpture etc. For Peter Cardew, craft referred to the execution of his designs by tradespersons. The confusion involves the use of the word “craft” in the modern context. Today architecture is built by tradespersons, carpenters, joiners, masons, plumbers, electricians, etc. The word “craft” can be a verb or a noun. In each case it refers to the work of a craftsperson as in “to craft a piece of furniture” or “the potter’s craft”. The word “trade” can also be a verb or a noun but when used as a verb it does not refer to the work of a tradesperson. To trade a piece of furniture means to exchange it. Modern craftspeople have been struggling with their identity and place in our culture for decades. We no longer rely on craftspeople to make the things we need. In the modern world these things are produced by industry and distributed through stores. Craftspeople today see themselves as artists, as designers and makers of the unique things they produce. The role of the craftsperson has changed but language has not changed in step. The word “craft” is still used as it might have been centuries ago. In the production of architecture, craftspeople have been replaced with tradespersons. Rather than creating new words to describe the work of these tradespersons, the word “craft” has been retained. This I believe was the basis for the confusing presentation given by Peter Cardew at the CCBC forum. For the modern craftsperson, this confusion continues.

A few weeks ago I posted an article about a portable vise I had designed. Before it was posted I had already placed an order with a local wood supplier for enough Beech to build it, but hit a snag a few days afterwards. The yard had problems coming up with Beech in the thickness I wanted, which was 1½". I called around to a few other local suppliers and heard the same story; nothing thicker than 1". I found that I could get the stock I needed from a supplier in the States, but was shocked at the cost to ship it up to me. When I stated such, the supplier said something that made me rethink my choice of Beech for this project, which was; "Beech isnt exactly the lightest species of wood." Given this is supposed to be a "portable" vise, naturally this comment caught my attention. I aint gettin any younger here, so not wanting to have to slug around something that weighed a ton, I thought I should do some more research.

Almost everything about workbenches that I came across stated that Beech was the material of choice, mainly due to its "density". Why everything to do with woodworking has to be so bloody technical, Ill never know, but I decided to see if there were other species of wood that came close to Beechs "density", but weighed less. I had seen Density Values listed on many different wood suppliers websites but I really didnt have a clue what it really meant, so I decided the first up on my agenda should be figuring out exactly what the hell "density" meant.

Huge mistake.

I really have to be honest here; I am so far removed from an analytical thought process, I dont even fully understand what that term really means, so trying to decipher pretty much all of the definitions for "Density" that I found was as impossible for me as making cream from sand. Why do those that post definitions on the web think everyone is as like-minded as they are? Hell, if I could think like them I wouldnt be reading their damned definitions in the first place, but instead, I would be posting my own, which, I must admit, is exactly what I am going to try to do here, but one I came up with that, hopefully, rewrites the gobbledygook in laymens terms.

den·si·ty (dĕnsĭ-tē)

1. Basically, the amount of wood in a piece of wood.
2. The more "fibers" (read that as "wood") a wood has per square-whatever, the stronger it is.
3. Density of wood is defined by a decimal value.
4. The more dense the wood, the higher the decimal value.
5. The higher the density value, the stronger the wood is, which means the less effect wailing on it has.
6. There are as many different ways to calculate a woods density as there are species of the damned stuff, which causes me to believe that anyone in their right mind should stay the hell away from the subject whenever possible. (which, in turn, explains why I didnt)
7. The standard way to measure the density of wood, or at least the way I gleaned it to be from reading about 100 different articles on the subject, is by taking the weight of a specific volume of wood which has been properly dried and dividing it by the weight of the same measurement of the same species of wood which hasnt, or is still "green".
8. Once you understand the principles of calculating Density Values, you realize that to calculate it, you first have to find the weight of the particular species of wood you want to know about in both its green and dry configurations, and if you can do that, you can also find a Density Value list somewhere, so for Gods sake, use it, and forget about going through all this other shit!

So putting all rational thought aside, I took my new-found knowledge for a test drive and learned...

• A cubic foot of dried Beech has a weight of 45-pounds and by dividing that value by the weight of a cubic foot of green Beech, which is 54-pounds, the density factor of dried Beech is 0.8333, or at least that is the value I am going to apply to it, despite any critics.
• Comparing that value with one for Poplar, for which a cubic foot of dried has a weight of 28-pounds and a cubic foot of green is stated to be 39-pounds, means that Poplar has a density value of 0.737, much less than Beech.
• With those two values as a base for "good" and "bad" densities for workbench production, I checked out Black Maple, which is one of the harder species and one that weighs in at 40-pounds dried and 54-pounds green; giving it has a density value of 0.740, meaning it isnt much better as a material to build a workbench from than Poplar, which was a bit of a surprise.
• Checking out the Mahogany that I have had hanging around in my stash for over 10-years now and the material was thinking of using for this portable vise, I found it has a density value of 0.735, which tells me, as a workbench, it would really suck.
• So I did the same for the Red Oak that I also have in my stash, and found that its density value of 0.688, which means it will suck even more than the mahogany.

One of the main things I learned through this exercise was that I wasnt as smart an ass as I thought I was, so Im going to have to head back to the drawing board and come up with a better design for this portable bench that is lighter, but just as strong. I also learned that it will have to be made from...go figure...Beech, and more specifically, Beech in 1" thicknesses.

Peace,

Mitchell