Re: [baidarka] to peg or not to peg

stephen (
Wed, 20 May 1998 20:52:18 -0700

Message-Id: <>
Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 20:52:18 -0700
From: stephen <>
Subject: Re: [baidarka] to peg or not to peg

I believe you are correct. I also observe that flathead screws have a
coneical undersurface to the head. This would certainly wedge apart the
fibers of the wood. However any of the screwheads which have flat underheads
would be a little less distructive. In my view.
Steve Yahn

At 11:50 AM 5/20/98 EDT, you wrote:
>Hi there~
>Having survived engineering school with my humanity intact, I thought I'd
>give my two cents on the peg vs screw vs lashing inquiry.
>>From a basic "Strength of Materials" point of view, ANY material removed
>from the gunwales acts to weaken their resistance to the bending moment
>existing along their length. At the deck beam cross sections the mortise
>cut has already removed 1/4 to1/3 of the material, so it seems to me that
>in the interest of maintaining flexibility and strength , lashing is the
>way to go.
>If holes are going to be drilled through the gunwale (ie for pegging),
>they should be through the mid-point with the axis of the hole(s)
>perpendicular to the bend of the gunwale. This places them along the
>"neutral axis" where, in theory, no bending stress exists ( stress
>increases linearly with distance from the mid-point: inboard =max
>compression; outboard=max tension).
>Screws seem like a bad choice because their threads are going to "work"
>the wood as the frame flexes, possibly initiating a crack in the gunwale
>or the deck beam tenon.
>Well, that's one opinion. I wonder if anyone has done a 3D frame analysis
>on the baidarka. The joints get worked in so many ways that it would be
>difficult to account for all the loadings.
>You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
>Get completely free e-mail from Juno at
>Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]