this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2025
36 points (100.0% liked)

Woodworking

7026 readers
32 users here now

A handmade home for woodworkers and admirers of woodworkers. Our community icon is submitted by @[email protected] whose father was inspired to start woodworking by Norm and the New Yankee Workshop.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I’m thinking of making something similar to these stackable shelves. But I want to do it using hand tools only so it seems plywood is out of the question (searching online said it would damage my Japanese hand saw). So I’m looking at solid wood instead and getting pine hobby boards that I won’t have to plane seems to be the easiest and cheapest alternative. The shelves will mostly hold records and books and the largest will probably be 30x30x75cm but stacked on other shelves. Am I in for a bad time?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 22 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

I don't like this system for two reasons.

The first being that bookshelves should have a restraint system that attaches to the walls. You could probably improvise something, but the video lacks that element.

The second is that the alternating brick pattern is weak for an open faced box. That puts a significant portion of the weight of higher courses on the middle of the span of lower courses. You can see some of the lower levels bowing signicantly. Since the back is rigid, but the front can flex, that will increase the tendency to tilt into the room and makes the tipping hazard worse. Add in an old floor that is concave and you have a significant hazard.

I like the concept, but this needs some changes before it is safe.

Edit: I'll suggest potential improvements rather than just naysaying. You could make two different width boxes. A full width and something like .8 width. You would stack the boxes alternating full width with partial width. The full width box would need 4 alignment pins and 4 slots. The boxes would stack in line vertically, but due to the alternating widths would still lock adjacent columns together. The important thing is that the vertical walls would be close together rather than landing in the middle of the spans.

Then I would add a cap board that can be bolted into the top boxes and would be used to attach a L bracket to a wall stud. Yes, this decreases portability, but not crushing children is more important than convenience.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Thank you for the details and suggestions. My plan is to have boxes of differing widths, and while my floor and walls are pretty flat and straight and children shouldn’t be a concern, I was considering adding restraints as it grows taller.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

That's a common misconception:

a grown-up falling will grab things on chest height. Or if one gets dizzy it's similarly dangerous.

Listen to the person above please: fixate them.

To be fair: it's a low risk but one that can be mitigated with ten minutes of thought and work.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

I like to live dangerously, except with power tools. Those I do not live dangerously around