The author isn't wrong about tight clamping potentially limiting glue penetration, but that's what edge preparation is for. In the books I've bound thus far, I first scored the binding edge in crosshatches with a carving tool, then brushed on a first layer of glue and pressed a strip of cotton roll gauze into it, and finally gave that a second layer of glue.
It worked pretty well; I rarely have trouble with pages coming loose or bindings cracking in the books I've made. I have a few ideas for how to further improve the result, but those will have to wait for when I find time to pick up the hobby again; lately the most I've done is quick stitched bindings for small booklets when I want to include some essay or article as a supplement in my diary.
For spines I prefer black bookbinder's tape. It looks more handsome than duct tape, and takes silver paint pen very well for titling.
When applying the glue, fan the spine end out by bending the pages out to one side, glue, then the other side, more glue, then clamp. That gives the glue more surface area to adhere to, making for a longer lasting binding.
The technique is called the double fan method, and would work fine with the rest of the techniques here.
Proper double fan gluing means shuffling the papers together to get a nice edge, standing them on edge so the spine is upward and somehow clamping or bracing it (ideally, it's between two boards in a laying press, but there's a lot of ways to make it work) and then pushing the spine to one side, fanning out the spine edges so a bit of the side is exposing. Spread glue, then push the spine to the other side the same amount, exposing the other slight side of the page and reapply glue. Then straighten the spine.
This will leave between the pages for, ideally, less than 1/32nd of an inch or a quarter millimeter, which will vastly improve the strength of the glue's attachment to the pages without significantly impairing one's ability to open the pages mostly flat.
As someone who just completed my third and fourth courses in fine leather binding, I can say with authority that this is a very quick and sensible method of making a durable binding for this level of value. As Falcolas noted, this is partway to doing a double fan method, which specifically allows for the glue penetration the author is looking for.
What the author could also do is get some board (like, say, the cardboard on the back of legal pads), clamp all that together prior to gluing, extend the spine an inch off a countertop with heavy books on the rest of the book block to hold it still, and then use a hacksaw to saw into the spine at intervals, about 1/32nd of an inch deep, crosswise to the spine. Take a piece of thread, dental floss, or fine string, and after gluing, press it into the first channel, loop back into the second, then the third, etc. Wipe excess glue and then put the duct tape over the spine, pressing it down evenly--THEN you fold the tape over the front and back at the same time, taping down the thread loops to the front and back of the board. Now you have a semi-hardcover, depending on the thickness of the boards.
Note that the duct tape adds little to the structure. You could also use a piece of cotton or linen in its place, you just have to glue it down to the front and back. This would be stronger, longer term, because PVA will hold better than duct tape adhesive over the years. If you do, cut the cloth "on the bias" meaning at 45 degrees to the weave. This prevents fraying and increases overall strength, for the forces it will encounter. If you do this, you can add another layer of PVA to the spine on top of the cloth, which increases strength.
My wife is a teacher and we created something like this as an exercise for all of her art students to make their own journals, with the final step being covering it with kraft paper. They loved it, used it for their art journals all semester, and asked to do it again at the end so they could have another.
If you get the basic assembly and gluing right, you'll be very surprised at the durability of something like this, including a lot of punishment like opening the book flat and using your hand to "break" the spine. It'll hold together.
It's called "sawn-in cords", as in using a saw to make a channel to hold the cords. It was a very common technique in the 18th and 19th centuries in fine binding that allowed for faster sewing of the text block; the cords would be thicker hemp or linen cords, to which the boards of the book would be attached.
In "perfect binding", which is the name for the overall class of binding the linked article is describing, where individual sheets are glued together along one edge, it's still called sawn-in cords for lack of a better name. It's not a typical addition in perfect binding, but it's exactly the same technique with the same purpose: adding cords to increase strength.
Thanks a lot. It seems quite easy to do with simple tools so I will definitely try it. It is only that press thing that I would need to improvise somehow.
The simplest solution is some quarter inch plywood (art stores have these as panels in various sizes like 9x12" or 6x8") and some clamps. For overall pressure, add some heavy books on top. For sawing, if the overall assembly of pages and boards and clamps is stable, there's a bunch of ways for you to hold it steady, including just in your lap: the sawing is on a very small scale. You could also clamp the whole assembly in a bench vise.
I have one of those presses and it's definitely useful for a variety of binding tasks, but honestly, I've never used it the way it is in the video. I have a laying press [0] that I use for such things, and once you see the logic of that, it's pretty straightforward to reproduce the effect with boards and clamps.
Denim - from old trouser legs - is another good and long-lasting material for binding books. Back in the days of tractor-fed 9-pin dot matrix printers I made a number of books this way using a home-made book press, a bottle of PVA wood glue and strips of denim. These books still survive after some 35 years, the denim/PVA glue combination keeps up well without cracking or tearing.
I would suggest vacuum bagging. I've used it to fix soles to shoes and surfboard fins. You can buy the vacuum bag cheap on Amazon. I would first loosely fix the block of papers together. Add glue and tape to the binding edge then stick it in the bag, suck out the air and let atmospheric pressure fix it nicely.
PVA glue will indeed dry in a vacuum bag. Most wood glues used for veneer pressing or lamination are indeed PVA glues and vacuum pressing is one of the best ways to get an even clamping pressure on complex or bent laminations.
PVA glue cures by eliminating moisture from the glue, and the low pressure of the vacuum will serve to accelerate the loss of moisture from the glue.
I see. I missed the _drying_ part. The moisture has to go away from the glue for it to dry. We can help here by placing a flat water absorbing material on the tape!
I have a real soft spot for this kind of instructable, and I've done enough bookbinding to say that this one will work.
That said, let me present my decision tree for using duct tape:
if not closet.gaffer_tape then
if task.urgent then
online.order(gaffer_tape)
return closet.duct_tape or bail("ing wire")
else
return obtain(gaffer_tape)
end
else
return closet.gaffer_tape
end
For those who might not have caught the subtle distinction on line 4
While the terms are frequently used interchangeably "gaffer tape" and "duct tape" are very different tapes with very different glues, and very different stretch properties, for very different use cases.
That being said, I'm curious as to how bailing wire would be used in this scenario.
Far better than velcro are the mushroom hook[1] fasteners. Also, a nail-file will soften the edges of a nylon zip-tie (I assume a metal file would work for stainless ones).
3-in-1 is nice. So many people don't realize WD-40 isn't a lubricant. I worked at a bike store and had to explain to hundreds of DIY'ers every year after they completely ruined their bike's chains and washed out the cassette's internal lube.
The “WD40 is not a lubricant” trope isn’t true - it is a lubricant. That said, it isn’t grease, and can displace/remove grease in situations where you might not want that.
There are two main ways of book binding. One uses glue/adhesive, the other uses string/wire/tying. I'd assume the bailing wire would be used for the second type in a pinch if for some reason duct tape wasn't usable.
When I was in my printing apprenticeship we had to sometimes bind notebooks from Makulatur. We used the same method but with other ingredients there is special book binding tape made out of linen ribbon which makes the back more sturdy and is just as cheap as good duct tape.
Paper destroys sewing machine needles. They get blunt and then you'll have jams and knots everywhere before long. Make sure you have a spare for actual sewing before doing this...
You should use a tripoint needle typically sold for leather stitching to cut through paper. Regular needles are designed to push through a material that can be locally deformed with minimal resistance. It stresses consumer grade machines to shove a fabric needle through a non-fabric material.
2-punch hole is my favorite cheepo book binding technique.
This duct-tape thing still requires a bit of manual effort. 2-hole punch is a bit less popular (3-hole punch is everywhere), but 2-hole punch is smaller: both the binding clips and the punch itself is just more compact.
2-hole punch has two choices: the "long-side" 11.5-inch binding like a more normal book, or the "top-side" 8-inch. The standard clip works in both positions quite well.
I like it too especially for the reusable hardcovers. But glue bindings are quite more portable and could take more abuse. The punch holes take in some stress if you fuss a lot with the pages. For smaller booklets I just staple them together on the margin with like 12 staples 5mm from the edge. I often double side print myself a few articles or tutorials to read on the go and stapling never let me down.
Worth noting, this is “loose leaf” binding - every paper is individually glued to its neighbors.
Books are normally bound in booklets, with two pages on each sheet of paper, which is then folded in the middle. This requires that the pages be printed in a specific order, but many publishing tools support this, it’s usually called “imposition” or simply “booklet”.
These booklets are then sewn and pasted together into books, but a very quick and easy thing you can do at home is use a booklet stapler with a swinging head, like this:
https://a.co/d/bYfZUjj
Booklets stapled in this way can open fully flat with no risk of damaging the binding.
I was in cub/boy scouts as a kid. One of the first things I did when I got my handbooks was cover the existing binding in duct tape. I even managed to get beige tape to match the color of the boy scout one. Many of the other kids had books with pages falling out of the binding. Mine, on the other hand, held strong. About 20 years later, I still have the books in decent condition with their original duct tape bindings.
Similarly, I used to cover school books in brown paper and then over the top of that with sticky-backed plastic, which turn stuck Doreen only on the insides of the cover. Because it wasn't actually attached to the outside of the cover like just the plastic would be, and it would not tear like only brown paper (the actual required method) it formed an incredibly tough, slightly cushioned protective layer. Only my books came back at the end of the year without dog eared covers and dented spine ends.
One teacher had a moan because it wasn't strictly regulation but even they had to eventually concede it was a lot better.
Oh man this brings backs memories! When I grew up, we had this one book with all kinds of DIY home improvement and house-building instructions I loved to leaf through. It got so much use (and I think had already been passed to my family used!) that it completely fell apart multiple times. We sort of re-bound it with a similar method involving glue and some kind of reinforced transparent adhesive film more than once!
This is brilliant. I've been planning to print and bind some old journals from the Internet Archive and other places (eg Analog Dialogue), and I've been putting it off because I couldn't bring myself to set up for more involved binding methods.
But as other comments say, I may go with the purpose-made spinetape and maybe a cardboard cover (but then I'll start procrastinating over cover design!)
Is there anything like instructables but for electronics? I did electrical engineering basics years ago but never really did anything with it. I'm looking for something to play around with leds and little motors and maybe some PV cells.
hackaday.io has people showing off their projects in a different but similar way (though usually people on hackaday don't write step-by-step instructions.)
gotta say, while a decent instructable, the completely unnecessary use of the r word near the beginning really turned me off. Almost stopped right there.
This is probably a bit of a cultural difference. Not every English-speaking country considers the word "retarded" an ableist insult (as in, for many it has nothing to do semantically or etymologically with differently abled people). Same as the way Australians use the word "cunt" very differently than Americans.
It's a pretty damn recent shift even in the US. Tons of movies from the 00s up to the early part of the 20-teens still used it freely and there was no major uproar over it—in general, no-one thought anything of it. Practically no-one bothered to write "r-word" when discussing it rather than just using the term.
It can be jarring to hear in otherwise tame movies, now that we're conditioned to shun the word, but I'm pretty sure that conditioning is something that only a minority of people in the US have been exposed to, even today. Mostly those of us who are online too much, probably. Outside that sort of bubble I'm not sure how "problematic" it's actually considered to be, by the average person.
> Outside that sort of bubble I'm not sure how "problematic" it's actually considered to be, by the average person.
to be clear, i'm not trying to call you out with the following. I'm just using that sentence as an example because it's... such a _good_ example. It's not clear that you were even defending that sentiment so much as pointing it out, so please don't take this as me attacking you.
Statements like that are precisely the problem of abelist thinking, and precisely why we need to be active about speaking up for the minorities amongst us. It basically boils down to "it doesn't affect me or folks around me so it doesn't seem like much of a problem".
Most people aren't effected by stairs either, but they really suck for anyone in a wheelchair.
> Tons of movies from the 00s up to the early part of the 20-teens still used it freely and there was no major uproar over it—in general
Calling someone a "fag" wasn't problematic for the same time period too, except for all the people who it was problematic for.
I will agree that "retarted" is a word that a lot of Americans (most?) still think is fine to use, except for anyone with a family member or friend who people disparage with that word.
Does that mean we should continue to be "well, not a problem for anyone I know"? Or should we recognize that it hurts some people, helps no people, and stop using it.
I struggle with using it and frankly struggle with understanding why people are so offended by it. People seem to be orders of magnitude more offended by using it than calling someone an idiot, moron, mentally challenged, developmentally delayed, or saying they have an IDD.
The outrage honestly just comes off as white knighting.
I think "idiot" and "moron" have lost their edge because they've been so ubiquitous for so long they don't mean anything more than, basically, a euphemism for "dumbass".* The other terms you mentioned are just as offensive as the "r-word" in that context IMHO. Same for people who use "autism"/"autist" as a jokey insult. Using terms like that as insults in a public forum is in bad taste and unnecessarily likely to hurt someone's feelings over something over which they have absolutely no control.
*I'm aware these terms used to be more in line with the others, but frankly I'd also question the wisdom of using them in a public forum.
> I think "idiot" and "moron" have lost their edge because they've been so ubiquitous for so long they don't mean anything more than, basically, a euphemism for "dumbass".* The other terms you mentioned are just as offensive as the "r-word" in that context IMHO.
A dumbass is someone who is stupid or foolish. Stupid, fool, idiot, and moron are all terms that at one point or another were used to describe those with an IDD. They're all still acceptable insults AFAIK, but now not the "r-word". For the longest time it was a fairly tepid insult but suddenly has, for reasons unclear to be, become outrageous and objectionable on par with the "n-word".
> I'm aware these terms used to be more in line with the others, but frankly I'd also question the wisdom of using them in a public forum.
It goes beyond insults though, the term has become completely unacceptable as a witticism or in a self deprecating manner. It just seems arbitrary to me and feels like an arbitrary change to give someone the opportunity to seize the moral high ground in a disagreement by labeling you ableist.
Idk, I guess I'm just old an can't keep up. The day someone labels me an "ist" for saying "I'm an idiot" is the day I'm burning it all down.
> It just seems arbitrary to me and feels like an arbitrary change to give someone the opportunity to seize the moral high ground in a disagreement by labeling you ableist.
It is 100% arbitrary. Languages evolve arbitrarily. they're not planned. The word was a medical term that if you think about the literal meaning is simply descriptive. But that doesn't matter. What matters is usage. It has changed from a descriptive term to a significant insult for many.
It is, by definition, 100% abelist. Its current usage is to demean someone for their limited / different mental ability. There's no difference between making fun of someone for their mental ability or making fun of someone for their physical ability. No one argues that calling someone in a wheelchair a "cripple" is abelist. Why would you argue that calling someone with mental disability "retarted" isn't?
> Its current usage is to demean someone for their limited / different mental ability.
> Why would you argue that calling someone with mental disability "retarted" isn't?
No no no, that isn't what I'm saying at all. In my lifetime, it has *never* been acceptable to call someone with an IDD a retard.
HOWEVER, for the better part of the last 40 years you could call another able person a retard without raising eyebrows. Within the last 5 years or so there has been an abrupt change and the word is no longer acceptable to use under any circumstances. And I'm unaware of what occurred for that shift to happen.
Today if an able person said to another able person who'd broken their foot, "what's up gimpy?" it would be taken as a jest. However saying that to someone who is permanently disabled is highly offensive. The situation was the same with the word retarded up until recently.
"mentally challenged" and "developmentally delayed" aren't pejorative terms so they're not relevant to the discussion.
anyone can be an "idiot" or "moron" or do something "stupid". It doesn't denote anything specific other than "your actions weren't intelligent" and a sense of belittling.
"retarted" is a word that is extremely hurtful to those it is used against. I'm sure that "developmentally delayed" people are more sensitive to being called "stupid" than your average person, but it's nothing compared to being called "retarted". Imagine your brother or sister was "developmentally delayed" and was regularly spat on by society (as we do to anyone who is) and bullied and called "retarted".
Would you still say it's "white knighting"? Or would you stand up for your sibling and say "hey that's mean. don't call them that!"
I would like to think you would stand up for your sibling. I would like to think that if you spent a moment putting yourself in the shoes of someone who is abused with that word you would recognize that it has long since transformed from a medical term to a harmful slur that helps no-one, and hurts many.
I would like to think that you would recognize that people are worth standing up for even if you're not related to them, even if you don't know them.
I think you've completely misunderstood what I am saying. I was not suggesting it was acceptable to direct the insult at someone with an IDD. I was saying the opposite, that it was acceptable to direct it at someone *without* an IDD.
> "mentally challenged" and "developmentally delayed" aren't pejorative terms so they're not relevant to the discussion.
A pejorative is all about context. If you're in the southern United States and someone says to you "bless your heart" or "oh sweet child", you've just been insulted.
Calling your able bodied sibling "mentally challenged" is no different than calling them "retarded".
> anyone can be an "idiot" or "moron" or do something "stupid"
Fool, idiot, moron, and stupid were, like retard, once used as terms to describe someone with an IDD.
But if you're writing for the wider english-speaking/reading internet, you probably want to be aware of these things to avoid unintentional offence, just as I assume Australians modulate their usage of 'cunt' for different audiences online.
When I worked at Office Max 24 years ago, they had a printing machine from IBM that looked like a photocopier with a PC on top. It took cassettes of wire and made it's own staples. I don't recall what the page limit was but I feel like it was several hundred pages.
I staple as well but never go more than 30-40 pages and with double sided printing (sometimes 4 pages in one) gives me enough to read on the go. I like the format because it can take any abuse or scribbling and is just a print away from getting a new one.
It worked pretty well; I rarely have trouble with pages coming loose or bindings cracking in the books I've made. I have a few ideas for how to further improve the result, but those will have to wait for when I find time to pick up the hobby again; lately the most I've done is quick stitched bindings for small booklets when I want to include some essay or article as a supplement in my diary.
For spines I prefer black bookbinder's tape. It looks more handsome than duct tape, and takes silver paint pen very well for titling.