5 ms·
"The lumber is indeed cut at the mill to its nominal size (like 2x4)" That is still true today?
by coronadisaster 6y ago
"The lumber is indeed cut at the mill to its nominal size (like 2x4)"
That is still true today?
- beervirus 6y agoYeah I’m not sure about that still being the case. I’ve always read that these numbers are just a historical artifact.
- DrPhish 6y agoI do industrial IT for a Candian wood products manufacturer (dimension lumber, studs, veneer, plywood, OSB and previously Kraft paper) and I can say for certain that it is still sawed to a 2" by 4" shape in the sawmill and (after being kiln-dried) planed down in, well, the planermill. The 2x4 is "nominal" and doesn't represent the final dimensions of the finished product. And yes, rough 2x4 lumber is still sold, and it is in fact 2" x 4". Wood products manufacturing is fascinating, and I could go on about various minutiae all day. AMA I guess?
- TwoBit 6y agoWell any interesting facts would be useful.
- coronadisaster 6y agoIs the metric system on the horizon?
- DrPhish 6y agoThere is a mix of metric and non-metric products, with panel products having more than lumber. Occasionally you even run into other weird measuring systems such as in traditional Japanese beams. North America seems very stuck in imperial measures when it comes to lumber specifically, likely due to entrenched skills and thinking in carpentry. Even PET (precision end trimmed) products designed for cookie-cutter construction are in inches (eg 140 and 5/8"). There is even resistance by old guys against metric threading on machines since all the old tooling and warehouse stock is imperial!
- oh_sigh 6y agoIf mills can cut closer to actual vs nominal sizes and finish equally, then they will choose that, because every cut turns $(wood) into trash(sawdust).