The application relates generally to hardwood floorboard assemblies and, more particularly, to a new hardwood flooring tongue and groove arrangement.
In the hardwood floor industry, two main types of hardwood floor are found on the market, 1) solid wood and 2) engineered wood composed of superposed layers of wood. Solid hardwood floorboards are manufactured pre-finished or unfinished. In the pre-finished hardwood floor, the sanding and varnishing process is done at the factory by opposition to the unfinished flooring where the sanding and varnishing are executed on-site after installation of the hardwood flooring.
The manufacturing process of pre-finished hardwood floor includes varnishing and/or staining steps on assembled floorboard sections of typically 4 feet wide. These sections allow effective use of sanding techniques prior to or concomitant with the varnishing and/or staining steps. There is a need for the manufacturers, to have a tight assembly of the tongue and groove joint between each adjoining floor hoards to prevent the same from becoming disassembled from one another during the sanding and varnishing process.
During the varnishing process, the floorboards can be assembled and disassembled 2 to 3 times prior to its final packaging. The manufacturers also traditionally packed the floorboards in 4 layers of 3 or 4 wide assembled floorboard panels. There is thus also a need for facilitating the separation of the floor boards into layers of 3 or 4 assembled floorboard panels without damaging the tongue and groove joint.
The requirement of having a tight assembly of the tongue and groove joint during the sanding operation is a major inconvenient for floorboards installers who need to disassemble the floorboard packages before the installation. If excessive force is used to separate the floorboards, especially those who were exposed to humidity, by applying excessive force, it may cause permanent damage to the tongue and groove joint and/or result in an increase of disassembling time and efforts for the installers.
None of the traditional floorboards are designed to provide a solid board assembly to prevent disengagement of the individual floor boards during the factory sanding process while still providing for easy disassembly of the pre-finished floorboards into floorboard sections of 3 or 4 floorboard panels prior to packaging and/or into individual floor boards prior the installation. If prior-art tongue and groove designs were made to ease detachment of floorboards, they could not insure a tight assembly during the manufacturing or installation.
There is thus a need to provide floorboards with tight assembly of the tongue and groove joint for the manufacturing process while remaining easy to detach at the time of installing the hardwood flooring.
In view of the foregoing, it would be desirable to provide a tightly assembled tongue and groove joint to prevent individual floorboards from being disassembled during factory sanding and varnishing operations while providing for relatively easy manual separation of the boards by the contractor at the time of installation.
Those contradictory requirements can be met for a tongue-and-groove design that provides a firm grip and a tight assembly of floorboards to insure quality of processing at varnishing, while allowing ease of disassembling by a simple rotational or pivotal movement of the floorboards to ease the work of the installer without modifying the traditional way of installation.
According to a general aspect, there is thus provided a floorboard assembly comprising: at least first and second hardwood floor boards adapted to be mounted in a side-by-side coplanar relationship, the first floor board having a tongue extending longitudinally along a first side thereof, the second floor board having a groove extending longitudinally along a second side thereof, the groove having a width defined between a top lip and a bottom lip, the tongue being received in a tight fit manner in the groove to provide frictional resistance against translational separation of the first and second floor boards in a common plane thereof, a top surface of the tongue being in frictional engagement with an undersurface of the top lip of the groove from a top outermost contact point to a top innermost contact point, a bottom surface of the tongue being in frictional engagement with a top surface of the bottom lip of the groove from a bottom outermost contact point to a bottom innermost contact point, the top outermost contact point and the bottom innermost contact point defining a first diagonal, the top innermost contact point and the bottom outermost contact point defining a second diagonal, one of said first and second diagonals having a length sufficiently greater than the width of the groove to substantially lock the first and second floor boards against relative pivotal movement in one of an upward or a downward direction associated with said one of said first and second diagonals, and a clearance provided between the tongue and the groove, the clearance reducing the length of the other one of said first and second diagonals to approximate the width of the groove to permit an angular withdrawal of the tongue from the groove by manually pivoting the first and second boards toward each other in the other one of said upward and downward directions.
According to a further general aspect, there is provided a pre-finished floorboard assembly comprising at least first and second solid wood floor boards, the first floor board having a tongue extending longitudinally along a first side thereof, the second floor board having a groove extending longitudinally along a second side thereof, the groove having a width defined between a top lip and a bottom lip, the tongue being insertable in frictional engagement in the groove to counteract pull-apart forces exerted on the first and second floor boards during factory sanding and varnishing operations, and at least one play provided between the tongue and the groove at one of a tip portion of the tongue and an outermost portion of the top and bottom lips of the groove, the play being configured to allow the tongue to be angularly withdrawn from the groove by manually pivoting the first and second floor boards towards one another in only one of an upward and a downward direction.
The term “floor board” should not be strictly construed to the preliminary meaning of the word and is intended to broadly refer to any floor planks, floor strips and the like used in the fabrication of a hardwood flooring.
Floor boards can be made from different hardwood essence, such as pin, oak, maple, wild cherry, cherry, birch and walnut. It is understood that the present invention is not limited to only those commonly available wood species.
Reference will now be made to the accompanying drawings in which:
Accordingly, the only way of disassembling the floor boards 10 and 12 without breaking the tongue 14 or the lips 22, 24 of the groove 16 is to pull apart the boards 10 and 12 by applying withdrawal forces in the plane of the boards 10 and 12 in a direction opposite to a direction of insertion of the tongue 14 in the groove 16, as depicted by arrows P1 and P2. The top and bottom frictional surfaces respectively defined between: 1) top contact points A and C and 2) bottom contact points D and B, provide resistance against the linear withdrawal of the tongue 14 from the groove 16. It can be appreciated that the distance between top contact points A and C is equal to the distance between bottom contact points D and B. The tighter the fit between the tongue 14 and the groove 16, the greater the forces P1 and P2 must be to separate the floor boards 10 and 12. A tight fit is particularly desirable where the floor boards are to be pre-finished (factory finished). If a loose fit is provided, the boards run the risk of becoming disengaged from one another during the sanding and varnishing procedures, thereby resulting in poor quality finish. However, once on-site, it is desirable for the boards to be easily separable to facilitate the installation thereof. The above tongue and groove joint arrangement with planar disengagement of the boards does not meet the above contradictory needs. Therefore, compromises had heretofore to be made between a good quality finish and easy installation.
Turning to
It can be appreciated from
It has been found that pivotal separation of the floor boards 10 and 12 can be achieved without risking breaking the tongue 14 or the lips 22 and 24 of the groove 16 for lip clearance angles θ up to about 20 degrees. It is understood that this upper limit may vary depending on the level of compressibility of the wood species used to form the floor hoards. For instance, soft wood species, such as pine, may permit slightly greater lip clearance angle. It has also been noticed that the effort required to pivotally separate the floor boards 10 and 12 noticeably increases for clearance angles θ greater than 16 degrees. A 16 degrees lip clearance angle corresponds for instance to a 0.07 inch long top contact line AC for a 0.240 inch groove opening (i.e. distance between top and bottom lips 22 and 24 of the groove 16) in the example illustrated in
It has also been found that if the lip clearance angle θ becomes too small (i.e. the distance between the top outermost and innermost contact point A and C in
In the embodiment illustrated in
Accordingly, the pivotal movement of the tongue 14 in the groove 16 has been unlocked in only one direction (i.e. the upward direction).
As shown in
As shown in
The length L3 of the lip undercut 26′ can represent 15% to 30% of the length or deepness L4 of the groove 16. The play P′ defined by the first undercut 26′ can represent 5% to 20% of the width W of the groove 16. A play P′ of at least 0.020 inch can be made in the undersurface of the upper lip of groove 16 for a 0.240 inch groove width W. The transition angle β defined by the undercut 26′ can be about 10 to 50 degrees.
However, if downward pivotal efforts are applied on the floor boards 10 and 12 as represented by arrows R2 in
Now referring more particularly to
Irrespective of their emplacement (on the tongue or the lip of the groove) the undercut can have various profiles. For instance, the undercut can have a stepped profile (
According to this embodiment, the diagonal AB remains unchanged as compared to line AB on
The above described tongue and groove arrangement is advantageous in that it can be “retrofitted” or adapted to any conventional tongue and groove arrangements. Also, it does not necessitate the purchase of any special tooling apart from new cutting knives having a cutting edge profile corresponding to the additional undercuts to be defined in the floorboards. It also facilitates the verification of the planarity between two adjoining boards since the tongue and groove engagement can be made very tight. The above described tongue and groove arrangement also reduces the likelihood that the floorboards being returned to the manufacturer by the installers because the boards are too difficult to separate from one another. It also contributes to improve the quality of the finish of factory finished floor boards by ensuring a greater integrity of the connection between the boards during the sanding and varnishing operations.
Still further embodiments and modifications of the present invention are available. The scope of the appended claims is not intended to be limited, therefore, only to the specific exemplary embodiments described above.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2623707 | Mar 2008 | CA | national |
The application is a continuation of International Patent Application No. PCT/CA2008/001206 filed on Jun. 27, 2008, which claims benefit of Canadian Patent Application No. 2,623,707 filed on Mar. 7, 2008, which are herein incorporated by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2269927 | Crooks | Jan 1942 | A |
4599842 | Counihan | Jul 1986 | A |
5216861 | Meyerson | Jun 1993 | A |
5502939 | Zadok et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
5540025 | Takehara et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5570554 | Searer | Nov 1996 | A |
5618602 | Nelson | Apr 1997 | A |
6029416 | Andersson | Feb 2000 | A |
6182413 | Magnusson | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6209278 | Tychsen | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6247285 | Moebus | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6324809 | Nelson | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6397548 | Martin et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6421970 | Martensson et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6490836 | Moriau et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6505452 | Hannig et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6526719 | Pletzer et al. | Mar 2003 | B2 |
6581351 | DeVivi | Jun 2003 | B2 |
6606834 | Martensson et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6637169 | Niese et al. | Oct 2003 | B2 |
6675544 | Ou et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6681820 | Olofsson | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6682254 | Olofsson et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6823638 | Stanchfield | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6851237 | Niese et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
6968664 | Thiers et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
7003925 | Pervan | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7137229 | Pervan | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7188456 | Knauseder | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7441384 | Miller et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7484337 | Hecht | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7644556 | Grohman et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
20020095894 | Pervan | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020170258 | Schwitte et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030041545 | Stanchfield | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030101674 | Pervan et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030154681 | Pletzer et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030205017 | Palmberg | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030208980 | Miller et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040035078 | Pervan | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040168392 | Konzelmann et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20060010820 | Schwitte et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20070022695 | Magnusson | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20080148674 | Thiers et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20090077919 | Fam | Mar 2009 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2319723 | Dec 1999 | CA |
202007007473 | Aug 2007 | DE |
WO03122224 | Feb 2003 | WO |
WO2007117422 | Oct 2007 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Supplementary European Search Report, corresponding EP application EP08172859, dated Apr. 14, 2016. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20110016818 A1 | Jan 2011 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | PCT/CA2008/001206 | Jun 2008 | US |
Child | 12871219 | US |