I have to build some straight box columns and will be fluting them on 3 sides (4th will accept lattice). I have done some crude sketches on paper, and when I’m at the job I will probably just end up experimenting with different widths/spacing. In the meantime, I’m wondering if anyone has some good rules of thumb to go off of? Should the spacing be equal, or increased on the outer edges. What is a good proportoin of flute width to column width? I have a 1/4″ round nose bit, which I think will probably be too small.
Any help is appreciated.
Jon Blakemore
Replies
Jon
I looked through some books on traditional proportions, don't know if that's all that important to you as just plain aesthetics.
All the references that I see indicate a flute about 3-1 in relationship to the space.
But to make things easier I would just look at some fluted columns that are appealing to me and "steal" the dimensions from that.
If your columns are any size at all I would assume your box core bit is way to small. What are the dimensions of the columns?
I've built a number of columns, both round and square and mainly on historic places so there was something to reference from, but mostly just what looks good to you and the customer.
Doug
Too many flutes will make it look way too busy. You probably only want three to five flutes on the face.
All the spaces should be equal except for the two outside shoulders, which should be wider. The flats between the flutes should be slightly less than the flute size.
Forget the rough sketch and do a scale drawing. An erasure or a piece of paper is cheaper than all that work.
Many of mine have a 5/8" flute with a 3/8" flat.
Four flutes plus three flats gives 3-5/8" plus two shoulders about 7/8" for good yield from a 1x6 sizing at 5-1/4".
Play with it and it'll be fun
Excellence is its own reward!
Jon
After reading Piffins post I went through some of my pics and found what we had done in numerouse situations, most of these are contemporaries of the traditional fluted columns. You dont mention a size which would help.
None of the fluted columns are traditional in # of flutes or spacing, however they are pleasing to some people.
I prefer more traditonal architecture detail but thats just me, everybody had different taste, thank God.
Anyhow just do what looks good to you and the HO.
Doug
Edited 7/6/2003 2:16:39 PM ET by Doug@es
Doug,
Please don't take my comments as any personal criticism. Your craftsmanship is par excellance well above mine. These are my opinions and personmal taste comments only - offered for discussion.
But the proportions are unbalanced, IMO, for a lot of these. May have been ifluenced by someone else too, but the width to height is not typical for most of the classical work I have seen.
i.e. in flutre 2, the architrave, entablature, and capitals are fantastic, but then the fluted pilaster gets cut off at the knees to make room for a paneled plinth. lots of fantastic busywork there, but it takes away fom the beauty of the whole.
In flute five it works better because it matches with the massing of the beams above and it marries a step or chjange of level too. Apparantly, this is a room large enough to pull it off. A column that thick in a small room would be ponderous. I'd like to meet the rest of that house.
Flute four works really well! Too bad it's just a heatilator for company.
For me, analysing what works and what doesn't is how I learn and amke overall improvements. I try to take the classical work for inspiration. Too many owners want to crowd too many ostentacious details into something for show, instead of letting simple lines and proportions bring balance and beauty into the home.
Like I said, nothing personal in my criticisms - I do the same to my own work..
Excellence is its own reward!
Piffin
No offence taken.
I thought I said it but my strong suit is not articulation. I prefer classical details over what I was showing, just showing it for the sake of examples.
I agree that the proportions are not what I consider... well for lack of a better word, good.
The shop I worked at had someone draw everything up and then we would just build to the print.
You posted some pics a while back of the portico to a very traditional style home, cant remember exactly the house but when I see it I know it, it just jumps out at me.
All of these pictures were from the same building, and this guy liked everything overdone, too much was just the right amount. While trimming out this place I meet a group of trim carpenters that were from Kalona,Ia. they were Mennonites, so you can imagine there reactions to all of this. By the way Kalona is Wet heads fathers place of origin.
Anyhow, I certainly wasn't offended by your comments, I see some of the stuff that you do, (by way of your posts) and I see that you have a good eye for traditional styles, I think I do too, but sometimes you have to do what the customer wants, they just don't know what's good for them. ;)
Doug
I appreciate very much all the opinions given.
Doug, You were right about the 1/4" bit being too small. I went with a 1/2" bit that I bought.
Here is how it worked out. Column width- 3-15/16", height 56-1/4"
3 flutes, width was about 7/16" (bit was not at full depth).
The shoulders are 13/16" wide, the flats between the flutes 1/2".
Overall I am pleased with the results.
Thanks again.
Jon Blakemore
Sounds good..
Excellence is its own reward!
Jon
As Piffin said, glad it worked for you.
Maybe Piffin and I got a little carried away with the talk of traditional fluting, but speaking for both of us, and Piffin will correct me if I'm wrong, we just both have a passion for traditional architecture.
Hope that wasn't more than you cared to hear, I see from your profile that your 22 so maybe traditional woodwork isn't a concern yet. Hell at 22 I don't think I even ran a router yet, and when Piffin was 22 I doubt there even was a router. :)
Anyhow glad it worked, and if you ever need something over analyzed this is the place.
Doug
Doug,
On the contrary, I appreciate the thorough response. While I may not have contributed much to the discussion between Piffin and yourself, and I may not have utilized the advice to the extent that would be ideal, I was hoping for something deeper than "I just always do whatever looks okay".
I'm slowly learning of the mathematical dimension of design, and to tell you the truth, I think it's great. There is some rhyme and reason to what looks good. Now if I can just master and apply that...
BTW- to Piffin's credit, I know for a fact that they did have routers. The trouble was finding a stream/river that flowed fast enough to achieve a decent cutting head speed...
Jon Blakemore
I don't really know if they had routers or not back then. I was doing built-up roofs with hot asphalt in temps up to 122°. Design was far from my mind.
But it was also far from the minds of many in construction. The first oil embargo and Nixon's wage/price controls had the economy in shambles so buildings were being built in a very stripped down, utilitarian fashion with no money for frills.
Follow the history of architecture and you will see the blossoming of fine work when there was money to be spent. The gay nineties just before the twentieth century saw a lot of flourishing touches and craftsmanship buiolt on the indutrial revolution and the gold rush in Alaska and the silver discoveries in Colorado.
If you are getting an early start in life, read Palladio for a leg up..
Excellence is its own reward!
If you want to get the proportions corrects buy The American Vignola: A Guide to the Making of Classical Architecture (The Classical America Series in Art and Architecture)
It's a great book, cheap and easy to use. It will also help with the column height to width proportion such as a Tuscan column should be 7 to 1 (one foot wide for every seven feet of height). I see a lot of columns that are far too narrow for their height.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0486283100/email0b/102-4841451-9626529