Moulding standards?

[SteveHall]

Does anyone here know any history behind wood moulding shape standard numbers? I'm not looking for the authoritative statement, just any insights into where the numbering scheme(s) actually started.

There is a general direction in the industry to use a WM## format. You can find these in the big box stores and countless millworks catalogs online. Maybe 50% of the industry provides similar shapes for similar numbers. Obviously there's the opportunity for "custom" shapes, but despite some mild consistency, quite a few WM formats don't line up across vendors. It's bad enough that you can't really use one manufacturer's shapes and expect anybody else's numbers to match.

Why would anybody use a WM number that doesn't correspond to a larger standard? I'm curious, was there was some early 20th century standard that guided the industry for a while before it fractured?

For example, the good ol' WM-47 is a basic crown mold, approximately 11/16" x 4 5/8", and projecting 3 5/8"H x 2 5/8"W.

WM-47 at Wholesale Millwork
WM-47 at TW Perry
WM-47 at Home Depot
Colonial 47 at Lowes
HC47 at Hardwood Company
P-493 at Kelleher
CR4968 at Tilo
SMC-120 at Stephenson's Millwork
MS1405 at The Moulding Source
CR695 at Alexandria
F614 at Ferche
4p562-10 at MR Moulding Knives
etc., etc., etc...

The Wood Moulding & Millwork Producers Association (WMMPA) provide a catalog, but was there any earlier authoritative source? The shapes go back through Asher Benjamin, Alberti, Palladio, even to Vitruvius, but why any WM standard if nobody follows it?

(Anybody here seen Brent Hull and the Lone Star Restoration show? He supposedly starts with a library of early American pattern books. But I don't find many trim carpenters who want to work with a mill to create custom knives and shape limited runs of mouldings for a single architectural project for less than about 4x the price of off-the-shelf "standard" shapes. Except that it is hard to design with any standard library of shapes prior to selecting the carpenter and using his moulding source!)

 

[ScottM]

Steve just a thought. Call Cheryl at the Hardwood Store. I know they make custom mouldings. Maybe she can shed a light.

 

[Colin Helms]

Steve,
Check out Wood Moulding & Millwork Producers Association, their website is wmmpa.com. They have collected and publish Pattern books to identify mouldings since the late 1800's per their info.
Hope this will help you.
Colin

Steve, sorry I did not read all of your comment to see that you are already aware of Wood Moulding & Millwork Producers Association. My bad!!

 

[Gotcha6]

Most moulding houses will produce a set of knives for any customer's needs for a nominal fee. The moulding supplier we primarily use even has mouldings in his catalog named after the contractors designing them. The big problem with a non standard profile, as you may know, is it is hard to replicate without the original design. Taking an old piece in to match can be deceptive after it has 4-5 coats of paint on it. One big tip if you're having anything like that run; ORDER EXTRA.

 

[chris_goris]

(Anybody here seen Brent Hull and the Lone Star Restoration show? He supposedly starts with a library of early American pattern books. But I don't find many trim carpenters who want to work with a mill to create custom knives and shape limited runs of mouldings for a single architectural project for less than about 4x the price of off-the-shelf "standard" shapes. Except that it is hard to design with any standard library of shapes prior to selecting the carpenter and using his moulding source!)[/QUOTE]


Are you looking for a particular exact shape of an old profile? An old "standard" profile?. The reasons the cost is so high for customs is as you probably know..... knife grinding, a set of William and Hussey custom knives depending on size can cost as much as $300. More for a dedicated moulder like a Weinig. Then you have setup fees, usually another $100-200 depending on the machine. Planing and ripping stock.... yada yada yada...

 

[SteveHall]

Thanks for all the feedback. My day job is designing what other people have to build, so I like to start with reasonable standards if I can figure out what they are. But with moulding, the "WM" numbers seem to be a red herring!

 

[chris_goris]

Thanks for all the feedback. My day job is designing what other people have to build, so I like to start with reasonable standards if I can figure out what they are. But with moulding, the "WM" numbers seem to be a red herring!

Yea Im not sure they can be considered "standards". At one time, they may have been but now it seems they are loose interpretations of general shapes. It is possible that was the intent all along though. For instance the WM-47 you mentioned is crown with a certain spring angle and a quick google search brings up specific dimensions like you mention but unless there is a drawing with tolerances (and some governing body to enforce these dimensions and tolerances) then unfortunately there may as well just be a photograph. Since there never has been any way to control it, thats all that is necessary. I believe this is why many cabinet and furniture companies make their own, so they can control it.

 

[walnutjerry]

Thanks for all the feedback. My day job is designing what other people have to build, so I like to start with reasonable standards if I can figure out what they are. But with moulding, the "WM" numbers seem to be a red herring!

Steve,

A lot of people expect mouldings of past years and mouldings of today with the same stock # to match-----as you know, they do not. The change in production methods has had an impact on this along with many other aspects of production. The industry has moved from the old square moulding heads with knives that were 1/2" thick bolted to head to the modern round corrugated heads with tool steel 3/16 or so thick. Knives were once ground by sight freehand---now most use a profile grinder that has a pattern inserted and is followed with a stylus to reproduce the profile on the steel. The human factor of pride in your work plays a part as well. Setting the knives on the old square heads was a tedious thing hoping tightening the bolts did not move the knife. Now we have computerized machines that can be programmed to do repetitive set ups with much greater accuracy if all the steps are correctly done. There is probably computerized profile grinders out there now also. I spent 5 years as an employee of a millwork company and the moulding operation was under my supervision----it was a rare occasion that the same moulding # on different batch runs would match perfectly. We improved that tremendously when the company converted to round heads and the use of a profile grinder. We used the architectural drawings to trace to the pattern material and that pattern had to be shaped by hand to match the drawing. The outcome depends on the skill of the person making the pattern. So multiply all the above by the number of producers of mouldings gives you an idea of how many variations you may come up with. There are probably other factors I have forgotten about .

All the above sheds some light on the production but still does not answer the question of "why have the standards if the are not followed?"

Thanks for letting me ramble, Jerry

 

[chris_goris]

All the above sheds some light on the production but still does not answer the question of "why have the standards if the are not followed?"

Thanks for letting me ramble, Jerry

I think the thought process was, give the generic shape (within the dimensions on the drawing) and repetitive quantities dont really matter. How many feet of crown is in a typical house? probably no more 1000 and I think that would be alot. It doesnt have to match the house next door, just whats in side that house.

 

[walnutjerry]

That is true Chris. Where we had issues was when it was a big commercial job and part of the material "disappeared" and we would have to set up multiple times to fill the need. At times it was down to the last room being partially finished.

Jerry

 

[SteveHall]

There is probably computerized profile grinders out there now also.

I recently saw one, all I need to provide is a .DXF file.

...it was a rare occasion that the same moulding # on different batch runs would match perfectly.

I wondered how big a factor this is. I could see profiles "adjusting" as the knives wear. The important thing is for runs to match, but from lifetime beginning of knife to end there could be a bit of shape changing if the knives aren't changed frequently. Some manufacturers have very sharp corners and shaping and promise quality details... at premium prices.

We used the architectural drawings to trace to the pattern material and that pattern had to be shaped by hand to match the drawing.

As someone who gets to draw these, I'm now less interested in inventing than referencing all the knowledge, history, and vocabulary that's already been invented. Ironically, a lot of moulding operations offer "custom, just send us the CAD" for a very low up-charge.

So multiply all the above by the number of producers of mouldings gives you an idea of how many variations you may come up with.

That explains it. I was hoping to find the trace of a standard to attach design logic. Looks like I'm still caught between developing my own standards or synthesizing one from a few large, local manufacturers.

Thanks for letting me ramble, Jerry

Thanks for sharing your insights. NCWWs are a wealth of wisdom!

 

[walnutjerry]

Steve----the accuracy of repeat profile was pretty darn good after going to the profile grinder. Once the template was made for the machine it was a matter of placing the template in the machine and referencing the stylis to the pattern. The corrugated knives kept a constant height of the knives in relation to the heads. The moulding head was mounted on the grinder to insure all the knives would be the same height ( we usually ran with 3 knives but had the capability of running 6 knives) Even after grinding the knives had to be honed and that was done by hand. We were lucky in the fact our operator was a former machinist and had the "feel" for close tolerances. He was good at making the templates (from plexiglass) and setting up the grinder etc. BTW we ran some cornice members from 2 x 12 for a job at Wake Forest college. I think it was like a 15 member cornice and that was the largest member of it.