top of page
16"x16"x14" Loaf of cutting boards
1. Overview
I developed the Loaf Method in 2024 to improve the process of making end grain wood products.
I felt that traditional methods of making end grain cutting boards were inefficient, requiring too many glueing and cutting steps. This made me wonder, "Why not just glue all the pieces together at once?", and with that, the Loaf Method was born.
5"x5"x8" Loaf of coasters
Basic Steps of the Loaf Method
2. Background
The Loaf Method makes end grain boards and coasters.
An end grain cutting board is a cutting board with wood pieces that stand upright while an edge grain board has wood pieces running side to side. There are benefits to end grain constructions, including better resistance to knife marks. If you are curious, read more about end vs. edge grain here.
Cutting boards are a cornerstone woodworking product. The large demand for cutting boards motivated me to pursue the Loaf Method, because any process improvement to this woodworking product could make a large impact.
Strong demand for cutting boards dovetails perfectly with the Loaf Method's bread and butter: batch production. The Loaf Method can scale production at unparalleled efficiencies.
As I got excited about the Loaf Method, my next thought was "Who has already tried this method?". I scoured the internet and asked everyone I could, and found nothing (I discuss my research in 4.2).
However, woodworking is an old industry. One should assume every method has been done, and if no one is doing it, there is a reason why ;). I remained undeterred. I set out to discover all that I could about this method, and was surprised at every turn!
Producing 8 end grain cutting boards from 1 Loaf!
.. 3.1 Improved Time Efficiency
.. 3.2 Decreased Material Loss
3. Process Improvements
The purpose of the Loaf Method is to improve upon the Traditional End-Grain cutting board method. From my experience, the Loaf Method requires less glueing, cutting, and sanding than the traditional process-- saving time and material. The Loaf Method also allows for more creative patterns.
3.1 Improved Time Efficiency
Utilizing only one glue-up, the Loaf method (green), is more time efficient than with traditional methods (yellow).
Note that I compare the Loaf Method (10 boards) vs Traditional Method (3 boards). This is a fair and necessary discrepancy. These numbers are the expected batch size of one person working in a midsize shop. For example, traditional method's Step 3 "Glue panels" requires 6 panels to be glued, using ~6 clamps each, totalling ~36 clamps. Managing 36 clamps represents the practical upper limit for one person working in a midsize shop.
The tables above show how much time it takes to make each end grain cutting board. The loaf method is shown to be over 2x as time efficient per board for low/medium complexity patterns and over 3x as time efficient for high complexity boards.
The 3D Cube pattern board is an example of a popular, high complexity design.
Traditional End Grain Method
This 3D Cube pattern board requires an additional 3 intermediate steps. The Loaf Method's only change is cutting pieces at a 60º angle. You can see this on step 2 of the 3D coasters gallery at the top of the page. This requires little to no extra effort compared to a lower complexity design. This is an example of how the Loaf Method is much more time efficient.
3.2 Decreased Material Loss
3.1.1 Wood Losses
Every cut removes wood. So, naturally, less cutting steps means less wood lost. As designs increase in complexity, cutting steps may also call for large materials losses, or "off-cuts". For example, one may lose 20% of their total material in just one cutting operation if they are cutting angled pieces!
The below tables calculate the amount of wood lost during each step. The percentages are aggregated into a total percentage using a compounding losses formula.
Traditional End Grain Method
3.1.1 Glue Losses
Glue is also conserved using the Loaf Method. I will save us the burden of reading another set of tables and simply explain how we save glue: the majority of glue is squeezed out/ wasted during a glue up. Thus, fewer glue ups results in less glue wasted. The Loaf Method is centered around only using one glue-up. The traditional method uses two or more glue-ups.
3.3 Increased Creativity
Depending on the shape you cut your sticks, a Loaf cross-section can resemble nearly any design you can imagine. Traditional methods only produce a limited set of patterns: every pattern is generated by identical pieces that are shifted or rotated relative to each other.
Traditional Method: Rotating Pieces
Traditional Method: Shifting Pieces
The above patterns look nice, however, these patterns will always be limited to a repeating goemetric pattern.
The Loaf method allows you to join pieces together in any fashion-- symmetrical, asymmetrical, angled pieces, straight pieces-- it doesn't matter. As long as you can cut pieces of wood to that shape, you can make that pattern.
Loaf Method
.. 3.3 Increased Creativity
.. 4.1 Deterrents for Others
4. Why is no one doing the Loaf Method?
From all my extensive research, I have found nothing to suggest people are using the Loaf Method. I scoured the internet, woodworking patents, and asked woodworkers.
A simple way to detect if the Loaf Method was used to make a board: whether a product follows the strict geometric limitations of traditional methods or not. If an end grain board's pattern is outside the confines of repeating geometric patterns I would know a new method was used. I illustrated this concept in section 3.3.
4.1 Deterrents for Others
I have several hypotheses for why neither big box companies nor skilled woodworkers attempt the Loaf Method.
Big box companies mass produce simple end grain boards to be sold at low margins.
They employ lower skilled/ interchangeable labor sources not suited for:
a) Precise machining operations (Loaf Method pieces need to be cut to ±1/100 inches)
b) Glueing processes requiring rigorous and timely coordination.
Skilled woodworkers are not deterred by above tasks. However woodworkers may still fear:
c) lack of existing clamping methods for the Loaf glue-up
d) clamping pressure "Myths" that say you need 150+ psi of clamping pressure
e) glue will not properly dry/cure within the glue up.
f) Slicing large Loaves requires a large bandsaw.
g) The Loaf is very heavy (a 10 board loaf is easily 70+ pounds)
I embarked to either solve or debunk each of these concerns. This led me down several paths of incorrect experimentation and other paths of less- incorrect experimentation.
4.2 Similar Methods
My search did yeild many adjacent historical and contemporary methods. The Japanese Yosegi-Zaiku and Persian Khatam are most notable. These methods focus on shaving thin slices from small, intricate Loaves they call "Parquets". Each of their Parquets was painstakingly constructed over many glue-ups. The thin slicing produces fragile veneers of the pattern. These veneers are commonly put on the exterior of wooden boxes.
Compared to these methods, the Loaf Method features thicker slices, larger slices, and only one glue-up. (A few Yosegi craftsmen also turn bowls from solid parquetry blocks, however I have not seen any intention to adjust this method for mass cutting board production).
.. 4.2 Similar Methods
bottom of page