Hi Gabel,
Thank you. It is indeed fortuitous that we have been able to benefit from your relatively short time based and hence verifyable evidence, sadly however we cannot make the same comparative observations (i.e. before and after) on joint that is now several hundred years old.
Hi Tim,
It is the mortice face and tenon shoulder that does the work in a mortice and tenon joint and thus the face to face mating should be well aligned even if a hewn surface is the start point. Mating faces should be regularised (flatened) to provide reliable reference points that can then be transferred by scribing to create the mating tenon shoulder face cut lines.
As per the reply given above to Gabel is no longer possible to say with any certainty whether old time practices were technically driven or arose simply from working experience or even expedient shortcuts but since M&T face / shoulders are not necessarily at right angles when compared with the line of the joint then any slop provided in the joint will allow the tenon to slide in and will even accomodate a slightly "offline" tenon without the mortice sides interfering with the fit of the tenon in the joint.
I did not previously mention about the effects of drying of green timber i.e. on shrinkage & deformation of the joint but very tight and parallel mortice / tenon joints made in green timber must tend to promote cracking as the timber dries since there is no "forgiveness" in the joint and thus I think that slop is and was probably a necessary technical ingredient in making a M&T in green timber.
Your thoughts and observation are very welcome since what is in the process of being outlined here in this topic might be considered to be quite revolutionary (and maybe even a relief) to some when they compare what is being discussed herein with the standard "workshop" type approach that is generally taught to beginners and is also seen to be reflected in various "how to" timber frame books.
No offence intended to anyone.
Regards
Ken Hume
