Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rating: 5
Page 35 of 136 1 2 33 34 35 36 37 135 136
Re: historic hewing questionnaire [Re: OurBarns1] #18419 03/05/09 01:40 AM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,197
N
northern hewer Offline OP
Member
OP Offline
Member
N
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,197
Hi Don:

thanks for being so understanding of an old TFer like me

It will be interesting to hear from Ken's contact in Australia I sure hope that he will stop by the site with his educated slant on this topic.


One has to be careful of articles that appear in magazines they sometimes are not backed up by accurate research.

When I had access to the UCV research library I could wander through publications like the canadian patent records which I did many times over the years to prove or disprove at times issues that were before me.

We also had issues of 1860 hardware catalogues that were filled with items that could be purchased by local stores for sale abroad and locally.

Circular saws in their primitive forms were there as well as cloth tape measures that could be rolled up much as our 50 foot tapes are today.

NH

Re: historic hewing questionnaire [Re: northern hewer] #18433 03/05/09 06:31 PM
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 570
OurBarns1 Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 570
No problem...

What do they say about old TFers?

"Old TFers never die, they just..."



Don Perkins
Member, TFG


to know the trees...


Re: historic hewing questionnaire [Re: OurBarns1] #18439 03/05/09 08:50 PM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 959
K
Ken Hume Offline
Member
Offline
Member
K
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 959
Hi NH,

Chris How has come back to me and has asked me to post this on his behalf so over to Australia !! :-

You are much too kind in your description of my research. The bulk of the work has already been done in North America by Henry Mercer, Lee Nelson, Eric Sloane, Amos Loveday, Edwards & Wells, and very recently this year by Ryzewski & Gordon. I have only put the bits together and tried to fit in where we stand in Australia, and how the variations affect the UK.

To get a full appreciation I can forward my recent paper to Northern Hewer and others interested in this topic. NH is on the right track, and things that went on in USA were quickly noted in UK and vice-versa. Recent research has pushed back cut nails in America to around 1762 based on metalurgical finds. Barrel hoop was used and cut either by guillotine or by shears. The same thing happened over here in Australia when a party was sent from Sydney Cove, after the first landing in 1788, to Norfolk Island out in the Pacific to settle the island with some of the hard case convicts. They quickly ran out of shingle nails and cut more from barrel hoop; about 700 a day. So it's not surprising that the Yankees got onto this pretty early as nail shortages were critical from the 1650s or so. Their first machine was in 1790 and pretty crude, but did the job, using 2 levers and 2 foot pedals, by Jacob Perkins in Newburyport, Mass.

America struggled up until 1840 with changes in iron production and mechanisation. Thereafter they flew at great speed until around 1890 when steel wire nails came in to displace the cut nails. Over here in Australia we find the elegant US cut nail in the fine sizes used in softwood linings etc up until 1912. Australian carpenters seemed to like the finish or "fine" versions, easy to handle, to use, and to store. They were no use in Eucalypt woods, and broke easily.

To identify the changes, which were not uniform or linear, (depending on which State you are in), the neatest book is by Jay Edwards & Tom Wells, Historic Lousiana Nails; aids to dating of Old Buildings. This is beautifully illustrated and clear to follow. My only caution is that too much attention is given to the type of heads formed. Nelson's little pamphlet is also very concise and neat, but outdated now by more recent research.

Very roughly, cut shanks with hand formed facet heads are pre 1800. Those with struck heads and side pinched (across the shear of the cut) are pre 1830, though some say these were around in 1838. Neatly formed heads with face pinching, which slightly flattens the shank on the wider axis, will be after 1840. These are the ones we find here in Australia in thousands.
The Brits say they started importing simple US cut nail machines in 1811, but US sources say 1814!! Our MSc. colleague Adam Wilson found spur-head floor brads in a datable house of 1800 in Devon, England. Nelson & Mercer say they appear in the US in 1805-1810, so no one really knows who invented the cut spur-head brad. It may even be the Brits, using the American ideas, in order to develop the rising bed cutter needed to cut 2 nails at once, (because they interlock in pairs). In 1800, the Brits had machines capable of this, and Ryzewski suggests a shearing force of 300+ kilograms was needed, whereas in the US hand driven machines were being turned out by rival groups up until 1820 or so. America lagged in the introduction of steam power, & so relied on water mills up until 1818. The Brits started steam power for blast in 1698 with the Newcomen single acting engine, and in 1776 the canny Scot, James Watt, developed the double acting engine with seperate condenser to suit iron-works, which saved a fortune in fuel costs. The Cornishman, Trevithick, turned this into high pressure steam by 1801. Nail cutting and iron production followed these developments like a road map.

The true genius of the Americans was to challenge the long established pattern of hand made nails, each with its own function, and to develop a general nail shape, easily adaptable to needs and to timber, and CHEAP! That is until steel wire became available at a low price, then loading the machine was no longer a problem, and production costs were less than a quarter of hand loaded strip. Long established firms in Pennsylvania folded up in 6 years or so, or diversified to stay alive.

Ken, I hope that you will pass this on and please note that I will send a copy of my paper to NH and others who want same.

Regards to all the timber fraternity in the UK & USA.

Chris How MSc. C.Eng.

Hi NH et al,

Well you asked for it !!!!

Regards

Ken Hume


Looking back to see the way ahead !
Re: historic hewing questionnaire [Re: OurBarns1] #18447 03/06/09 12:52 PM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,685
J
Jim Rogers Online Confused
Member
Online Confused
Member
J
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,685
Originally Posted By: OurBarns1
No problem...

What do they say about old TFers?

"Old TFers never die, they just..."



they just let the chips fall where they may.....


Whatever you do, have fun doing it!
Re: historic hewing questionnaire [Re: Ken Hume] #18455 03/06/09 08:09 PM
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 570
OurBarns1 Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 570
"fall where they may..."

good one.




Ken:

Chris' post is quite a slew of info and seems to suggest no real certainty in cut nail developments whether it be US or UK dominated. But he did say the Brits began importing US cut nail machines in 1811...only to cast some doubt on the info a bit later.

I'd love to see his latest paper. Please take him up on the offer to send it to those interested.

He mentioned one thing I'm not quite clear on: what are "softwood linings?"...is that like paneling / wainscoting?

And what are your thoughts on my earlier theory that it was natural for nail technology to have developed here in the US b/c of the abundance of lumber, thus the pressing need for nails. I don't have a clue about lumber availability in the UK/Europe at the same time (roughly 1700-1900). Surely it was shipped to England from America.

Anyway Europe does seem to be well versed in no-nails-required methods of building such as masonry, wattle and daub, thatched roofs, etc. Perhaps European builders continued to rely on such technology rather than start nailing up everything.

thanks--

Curious on your thoughts...



Don Perkins
Member, TFG


to know the trees...


Re: historic hewing questionnaire [Re: OurBarns1] #18460 03/06/09 09:21 PM
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 687
G
Gabel Offline
Member
Offline
Member
G
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 687
Originally Posted By: OurBarns1

And what are your thoughts on my earlier theory that it was natural for nail technology to have developed here in the US b/c of the abundance of lumber, thus the pressing need for nails. I don't have a clue about lumber availability in the UK/Europe at the same time (roughly 1700-1900). Surely it was shipped to England from America.


My guess is that the reason so many building and wood processing advances (such as nail technology, circular saws, boring machines, the Square rule, balloon framing) were made in North America in the 19th century is that we had one of the biggest, longest lasting, most widespread building booms ever. We were growing like crazy -- this is where all the building was happening.


Re: historic hewing questionnaire [Re: Gabel] #18462 03/07/09 02:43 AM
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 570
OurBarns1 Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 570

Good point Gabel: it was a boom of wood-framed construction.


And living in Maine, us natives always remember that Bangor was the "Lumber Capital of the World" in the 19th century.


Don Perkins
Member, TFG


to know the trees...


Re: historic hewing questionnaire [Re: Gabel] #18479 03/07/09 10:52 PM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 959
K
Ken Hume Offline
Member
Offline
Member
K
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 959
Hi Don & Gabel,

There is nothing new about nails. They were used to nail Jesus to the cross and must have existed a long time before that.

Its wrong to think that timber framing is a "no nails" method of building - its just the opposite. Please don't loose sight of the fact that lath has to be nailed inside and sometimes outside as well to accomodate plaster and the quantity required can run into to tens or even hundreds of thousands depending on the bulding concerned. I find myself perplexed sometimes when I see attempts made by some to make us believe that compound joinery employs wood joint solutions when historicaly the more widely adopted solution has usually been to employ simple butt joints and nails.

I am not as informed about the development of nail making machinery as Chris How but I am familiar with Yankee inventiveness and find no surprise that manufacturing techniques developed rapidly in the USA especially once the break with mother England took place when this would have become a necessity and we all know that necessity is the mother of invention.

Regards

Ken Hume


Looking back to see the way ahead !
Re: historic hewing questionnaire [Re: Ken Hume] #18492 03/09/09 01:09 AM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,197
N
northern hewer Offline OP
Member
OP Offline
Member
N
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,197
Hi Ken and others

good point Ken and all that I can add is that what may factor into this whole equation was probably the following:

-accessibility to the purchase of nails eventho they may have been available ie no close retail stores
-the wealth of the individual in individual areas ie pioneering\new settlements, no capital to buy with
-trade barriers that interfeered with a purchase
-knowledge of the availability of certain items.

Technology spread in some areas very slowly due to many factors such as the seemingly huge distances to major distribution areas of hardware items. IN this regard I immediately think of the distance of Britain from Upper Canada the main supplier of trade goods with its fledgling colony.

For instance it took approx 60 years for circular blade sawing technology to reach Upper Canada and be put to use.

Trade with the major mills along the Eastern US Sea board eventually was to supplement and supply the mill parts and hardware items needed by areas like Upper Canada and other points further north and west.

Just as a matter of interest my father who undertook to construct a new Barn about 1946 right after the end of ww#2 could not purchase round steel nails due to a shortage of raw material here in Canada, at that time he travelled to New York state and was able to by a quantity of square cut nails in wooden kegs to work with. Also at that time they tried to introduce aluminum nails but I can remember as a young fellow, seeing the bent over nails that just couldn't be driven into the boards.

Thanks all for coming on board I hope everyone enjoys this thread

NH


Re: historic hewing questionnaire [Re: northern hewer] #18496 03/09/09 10:11 AM
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,882
T
TIMBEAL Offline
Member
Offline
Member
T
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,882
Eli Whitney (1765-1825) was a great American inventer. He created a system of standardization in machinery and production. The British and French made fun of him and his ideas, saying it denied the craftsman's individuality, which it did. Immigrants to the U.S. were able to purchase land quickly, in a mater of a few years. They could not do this working in the manufactruing industry, they had to work the land. Whitney saw this and in turn developed machinery to make stuff more efficiently, by reducing man hours. His system was called the "American System", he used it first in his firearms factory.

I am reading A History of the American People, and just came across Eli Whitney and thought of this thread and the manufacturing of nails question. The author, I believe, was suggesting American industry was a leading force in manufacturing and capitalism. And leading the way in making nails and many other items.

Tim

Last edited by TIMBEAL; 03/09/09 10:15 AM.
Page 35 of 136 1 2 33 34 35 36 37 135 136

Moderated by  Jim Rogers, mdfinc 

Newest Members
HFT, Wrongthinker, kaymaxi, RLTJohn, fendrishi
5134 Registered Users
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3
(Release build 20190728)
PHP: 5.4.45 Page Time: 0.088s Queries: 17 (0.066s) Memory: 3.2394 MB (Peak: 3.3984 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2024-03-28 18:42:25 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS