EFFECTIVE 14 Nov. 2012 PRIVATE MESSAGING HAS BEEN RE-ENABLED. IF YOU RECEIVE A SUSPICIOUS DO NOT CLICK ON ANY LINKS AND PLEASE REPORT TO THE ADMINISTRATOR FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION.
This is the Frank Lloyd Wright Building Conservancy's Message Board. Wright enthusiasts can post questions and comments, and other people visiting the site can respond.
You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, *-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned (and your service provider being informed). The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. You agree that the webmaster, administrator and moderators of this forum have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time they see fit.
The advantage of glued joints is that, unless or until (in the unlikely event) the adhesive fails, the pieces don't move at all relative to each other. This is preferable to the case of purely mechanical joinery -- whether by fasteners or by complex joinery -- where constructions fail by degrees, with movement between parts beginning as slight mis-alignment and progressing to looser and looser joints, the correct form (i.e., squareness) of the piece being degraded from the earliest moments of failure.
...being similar to Japanese joinery found here:
http://www.io24x7.com/index.php?main_pa ... 9514e37875
Well there might be a superficial similarity, but the Lloyd Wright detail is simply the stacking of one molding upon another, to build an articulated surface. It's all decor, not structure.
And the molding -- the batten, anyway -- is hardly something that a carpenter would try to make in the field. It would be ordered, custom-made, from a molding specialist with a three- or four-head "sticker" machine. And it would cost a hundred bucks or more for the knives -- so a second molding, with the face canted the other way (to make the lower part of the fence in a weather-proof manner, like the rest of the siding) would cost another hundred bucks -- for about 15 dollars worth of molding.
Whilst working with Malcolm Wells in 1963-64 I was responsible for a number of houses including one at Summit, New Jersey, and another at Norfolk, Virginia. I also designed and supervised the construction of a office building [chambers?] for some attorneys in Camden, New Jersey.
On occasions I speculate as to whether those buildings are still in existence. I never kept precise details of their locations after I left the U.S.A. in 1964.
There is not, nor ever was any glass. What you are observing are the supports for the roof of a screened porch, with the screens removed because the image was taken in winter.
The lot adjoins public open space, with a track going down to a popular beach. Visual privacy was a concern, especially in summer. the fence is on the lot line. What would you have done under the circumstances?
The house is a hemicycle, sited W10˚N. An outdoor area was required for dining in summer, and it made sense to site this to the relatively cool south-east, beneath a roof, and surrounded by insect screening.
The Kwila posts are at 1200 mm on centers, and detailed to hold the screens, which are portable, and stored during the winter months. The bronze insect screen mesh is held in Kwila frames, having 290 mm bottom, and 75 mm top rails, and 56 mm stiles.
I grant that the image is not all it could be, but cognizance had to be taken of the fact that the clients were gracious in allowing any photography. To impinge on their privacy to the minimum degree required that time was at a premium. It was just not possible to have a photographer camped there for days in order to get the optimum light and conditions for the shot.