[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [BKARTS] Chiming in, Reflections on double fan binding
- To: BOOK_ARTS-L@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
- Subject: Re: [BKARTS] Chiming in, Reflections on double fan binding
- From: Pete Jermann <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 23:40:56 -0500
- In-Reply-To: <PCEOIAKOMKFJGHACMKACAENEDEAA.email@example.com>
- Message-ID: <3DD04008.378.3460E6B@localhost>
- Priority: normal
- References: <20021110052856.DMPB23429.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Sender: "Book_Arts-L: READ THE FAQ at http://www.philobiblon.com" <BOOK_ARTS-L@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
From: "Ben Wiens" <email@example.com>
To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <BOOK_ARTS-
Subject: RE: Chiming in, Reflections on double fan binding
Date sent: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 16:15:12 -0800
> DID PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THE CONCLUSION?
> 1. Notching is not really recommended when double-fan binding "non
> coated" paper.
I am not recommending or discouraging notching. It is
probably not particularly useful, though, with non-coated papers.
> 2. Notching is generally recommended when double-fan binding "coated"
I never notched except experimentally and always rejected it as
an inefficient way for a non-mechanized hand binder to control the
spine. The goal is to protect the weaker adhesive bonding of coated
papers by controlling the movement of the spine. Notching is simply
one method. If you have expensive machinery that mills and notches
the spine in 2 seconds flat, then it may be worth considering. If you're
having you books bound by a large bindery that notches, that is
probably the best bang for your buck because it is quick and easy for
them. If you're a hand binder there a better ways (but I can't explain
them in 500 words or less and not without illustrations).
> 1. Notching doesn't increase the gluing area substantially.
It does increase the gluing area. Whether it's substantial is
dependent on the frequency and depth of the notches. My point is
simply that the increase in glue area is not the reason for any
improvement in performance. The stiffening effect of notching is the
reason for improved performance in those bindings that are better
served with a less flexible spine.
> 2. Notching stiffens the spine substantially.
Depends on the frequency and depth of the notches, as well as
the particular glue used. Notching can probably be fine tuned to add
any degree of desired flexibility/stiffness.
> 3. Notching increases the strength of a binding by stiffening it and
> allowing the book to open as much, thereby reducing the stress on the
> adhesive and paper in the spine zone.
> 5. Strings or adhesives often rip out of the paper notches if the book
> forced open.
In answer to Rupert's earlier response I observed that the
notches fully detach from the paper (if the paper splits at the notch, it
really makes no difference because ultimately it detachs from the
adhesive). Up close the action of the paper on the glue bead in the
notch is like that of paper on a ring binder, the paper simply glides
over the glue bead. However, this does not negate the value of the
glue bead as it still plays a role limiting the flexibility of the spine.
I'm not sure that I would completely group strings and glued notches
together. Though, structurally, they both stiffen the spine, actual
string, being inelastic, probably does it much more aggressively.
Strings are probably less likely to detach from the paper since they
are quite immobile compared to the much more flexible glue used in
> 6. The strength of a properly made double-fan binding using non
> paper is quite high already.
Briefly, on other matters Ben mentioned: 0.006 inches may
not sound like a significant amount of glue penetration between the
pages, but if the page thickness is 0.004 inches (close to a fairly
typical book page) this represents a 400% increase in the gluing area
compared to a typical factory produced, edge-glued book. If your are
dealing with thin paper (0.002") the percentage increase is probably
about the same though the glue line between the pages is less.
Thinner papers also tend to drape or flex much more readily than
heavier papers and don't require the same adhesive area as thicker
I'm not sure that trying to get the glue deeper between the pages (the
.012 that Ben is striving for) is necessarily beneficial. The deeper the
glue the stiffer the book.
As much as I would like to continue agreeing, disagreeing or
digressing with Ben point by point, I'm afraid he is moving at a rate
that I can not possibly keep up with (I still require sleep). :-)
117 South 14th St.
Olean, NY 14760
BOOK_ARTS-L: The listserv for all the book arts.
For subscription information, the Archive, and other related
resources and links go to the Book_Arts-L FAQ at:
Archive maintained and suppported by Conservation OnLine