Tag Archives: split board binding

The Split-Board Binding: Extensive Yet Extremely Effective

We recently shared a blog post on the Cincinnati & Hamilton County Public Library’s blog that serves as a companion post to this one. Both posts focus on the repair of two CHPL books, Covered Bridges and When Art Meets Design, that received split-board binding treatments carried out by Kasie. While this post focuses on the treatment itself, the other illustrates the journey of a circulating book through treatment in the lab (and at home) and its eventual return to the library. We highly recommend checking out A Journey from Broken to Mended: Repairing Books in the Preservation Lab.

As a hybrid conservation lab, we treat and house both special collection items and general circulating collection items, as well as everything in between. Special collection items are rare or archival materials that typically do not circulate; basically, books and other objects that you can’t take home with you, are out of print, valuable, and/or are less readily available locally, nationally or even globally. General circulating collections are typically books that can be checked out and taken home, and tend to be newer books, books still in print, and/or more popular books. Since we are a collaborative lab that means that we treat and house special collections and general collections from both the University of Cincinnati Libraries (UCL) and the Cincinnati & Hamilton County Public Library (CHPL).

Due to the nature of these two types of collections (general and special), the treatment, documentation and who treats what is very different. Before the pandemic, most of the staff’s time was dedicated to special collection items or the items that fall between the two categories, which we call medium rare, and our students and volunteers, with plenty of hands-on, one-on-one training, handled the bulk of our general collection repairs. But then working from home, all or a majority of the time, became the norm for Lab staff and we had to shift focus and turn to taking on more general collection repairs that we could more easily take home with us. Initially, we took home more difficult sewing projects and mending projects that our students or volunteers either hadn’t gotten to yet or were avoiding for one reason or another. Then, after we could return to the Lab in some capacity to prep our own materials, we realized that split-board bindings* were the ideal general collections treatment for staff to work on from home.

A split-board binding is a new binding or case that incorporates several newly added reinforcement elements that are then sandwiched between two pieces of board that make up the front and back covers.

Kasie’s split board binding cutaway model

Split-board bindings are a great solution for oversized, heavy books like coffee table books and art books with glossy pages, which are very common in both UCL and CHPL general circulating collections. They are also, by far, the most complex general collections treatment we perform in the lab and have always been done by the conservation technicians, instead of our students or volunteers. This is not only because of the complexity of the treatment, but also because of the lengthy treatment time involved; a student or volunteer’s limited weekly schedule in the lab is not conducive to such an extensive treatment. Though it was a general collections treatment reserved solely for the conservation technicians, prior to March 2020 the techs unfortunately had little time to work on these treatments, as our focus was primarily on special collections treatments and housing. Therefore, we had amassed a little backlog of split-board binding treatments – enter quarantine and working from home!

One question that might come to mind, if split-board bindings are so elaborate and extensive, why do them on general collections items at all? Why not just buy a new copy; wouldn’t that be more cost effective? Typically, the books that warrant a split-board binding are more pricey, glossy paged, oversized books, like art and architecture books. And unfortunately, though these books have a much higher retail price than your average James Patterson novel, the construction is generally less than ideal. These books might have beautifully printed, full-color, thick and glossy pages and dynamic cover art, which makes them attractive to the reader, but they also are often sewn with very thin, fragile thread that easily breaks. The spines are generally lined with a layer of rigid plasticized glue that can become very brittle over time. Often, the covers or cases are constructed solely of printed paper, not cloth, and generally have a thick piece of board along the spine (which we call a flat back) that doesn’t allow the book to flex properly when opened and can actually make the spine break down and tear in record time. It is not uncommon for these books to have little to no reinforcement in the attachment of the textblock to the binding (i.e. how the block of pages is attached to the cover), which makes the heavy textblock break away from the cover quite easily with use.

But why are these books constructed so poorly? These large coffee table and art books are constructed with individual use in mind, not with the frequent use and circulation that comes with a library collection item. The split-board treatment, along with many general collection repairs, improves on a bad binding design and makes the book stronger and sturdier, using better binding techniques and materials that can better stand up to use by many library patrons.

A split-board binding treatment involves creating a new binding with new sewn-on endsheets that are reinforced with cloth, at least three sewn on linen tapes (supports), new spine linings, and a new quarter bound case created with two boards at the front cover and two at the back cover, and generally an inlaying of the original cover designs. However, additional elements of treatment may be warranted based on the condition of the book, such as broken sewing, tears, detached leaves, etc. The steps generally proceed in the following order:

Prepare materials in the Lab – new endsheets, starched reinforcing cloth, linen tapes, spine linings, binders board, bookcloth and Bristol board for inlays.
Detach textblock from cover, if needed.
Remove original spine linings, mechanically and with poultices.
If broken, remove original sewing thread and disbind textblock.
Mend any tears and guard any separated, torn or detached leaves.
Sew to include linen tape supports and new endsheets using French link stitch – whether partial/added sewing over the original sewing or complete resewing is dependent on whether the original sewing was intact or if it was broken and the textblock disbound.
Round and back spine, as needed.
New spine linings adhered to the spine:
- Reversible layer of kozo fiber tissue with wheat starch paste.
- Original stuck-on endbands, if present, or new endbands.
- Cloth reinforcement lining (Cambric) with flanges that extends past the spine on both sides.
- Several paper linings to further support the textblock.
Create “laminated flanges”, the key characteristic of a split-board binding, using the sewn on linen tapes, the flanged cloth piece adhered to the spine, and the first and last leaves of the new endsheets. Cut laminated flanges into thirds, with the center portion incorporating all the linen tapes.
If the original covers included artwork that should be retained, mechanically remove from the original boards. Remove remaining board backing with poultice.
Remove and clean the original spine.
Cut binder’s board to size – 2 pieces of board are cut for both the front and back covers (4 pieces total). The thickness of the boards used is dependent on the shoulder of the book.
Determine placement of the board and adhere the middle laminated flange segment to the top of inner board, keeping the top and bottom laminated flange segment under the inner board, unattached. Adhere the outer board to the inner, thus sandwiching the middle laminated flange section between the two boards.
If the original cover is being inlayed, create and attach an inlay border of thin Bristol board to the cover boards, as needed.
Covering the boards:
- Attach the spine cloth piece and turn in at the head and tail.
- Attach the board cloth to the upper and lower boards and turn in the edges.
Bevel the remaining laminated flanges and sewn on cloth reinforcement (Cambric) slightly and attach both, in sequence, to the inner boards.
Adhere the pastedowns and trim the remaining sewn on Cambric to roughly 1/8” – ¼”.
If there are cover inlays, adhere the inlay(s) to the cover(s) within the inlay border.
Adhere the original spine to the new spine of the case.

When completed the treatment offers a substantial amount of support to the textblock and a robust attachment of the textblock to the new case. While it is an involved treatment that requires a good amount of preparation, work and skill, the end results are worth it all, and the improvements are significant.

Treatments of this magnitude take many, many hours over the course of several weeks. Often, only a few steps of the treatment can be accomplished at a time to account for drying time, and timing out visits to the Lab. To take a sneak peak at what some of the steps of treatment look like please check out the video below:

For an example of how Kasie used a split-board binding treatment and modified it for a special collection item that came to the Lab from UC’s Winkler Center without a case, check out her blog, A Monster of a Treatment.

We hope you’ve enjoyed this peek into a split-board binding treatment! If you did and you want to see more of what we do, and see the Lab, then please check out our Virtual Lab Tour which will take place on Tuesday, January 26^th at noon, live on the Cincinnati & Hamilton County Public Library’s Facebook page. For forthcoming information about the Virtual Tour follow the Public Library on Facebook and follow the Lab on Instagram (@thepreservationlab).

*This treatment was originally designed at the Brigham Young University lab. Then it was brought to the University of Kansas lab by Brian Baird, where our conservator, Ashleigh Ferguson Schieszer, learned the treatment and thus brought it to the Preservation Lab.

Kasie Janssen (CHPL) – Senior Conservation Technician & Jessica Ebert (UCL) – Conservation Technician

Returning to the Lab

After nearly 5 months of working from home, Preservation Lab staff are finally returning to the Lab and to UC’s campus in a very safe and limited way. In mid-March, like most of the country, UC Libraries and the Cincinnati and Hamilton County Public Library shut down, forcing staff from both institutions to pivot and begin working remotely. After many months of webinars, research, model making, box making, some general collections treatment, and a whole lot of Microsoft Teams meetings and town halls, both institutions are beginning to open back up and offer some services. Luckily for the Lab staff, throughout this period of solely remote work, our UCL co-manager and Preservation Librarian, Holly, would make weekly or bi-weekly runs to the Lab to pick up materials we might need while working from home. We would then schedule our contact-free pick up of requested materials with her. The whole process ran rather smoothly and got us by for many, many months.

Since the Lab is located on UC’s campus, in Langsam Library, the Lab follows UC’s procedures for Returning to Campus. The preparation for returning to the Lab involved a workplace assessment of the space, a phased plan for returning to the Lab (which was vetted and approved), mandatory COVID-19 training, daily wellness checks, mandatory facial coverings, and social distancing.

Jessica and Catarina, all masked up, during one of their first shifts in the Lab.

The Preservation Lab’s plan to return includes the use of a cohort system to reduce exposure and better aid in contact tracing, if needed in the future. For the month of August, two cohorts would go back for 3 to 3 ½ hour shifts, one day a week. For example, cohort #1 consists of Catarina and myself while cohort #2 consists of Kasie and Holly. Cohort #1 goes into the Lab on Monday mornings, while cohort #2 goes in Friday mornings. While working in the Lab, our focus is on production and treatment – this means that we are either actively treating special collections items or working to evaluate, measure or prep materials to take home for treatment or housing.

Catarina working on special collection materials from third party client Conner Prairie.

We’ve also made slight adjustments to our workspaces so that staff can stay as distanced as possible while they work. For example, Catarina has moved to our student staff bench area since she and I, under normal circumstances, are benchmates and work right across from each other. I don’t think Catarina is minding having all this space to herself to spread out and work on multiple projects at once while she’s in the Lab.

In anticipation for this exciting and overwhelming change – going from working from home for over 4 months and basically living in quarantine to going back into the Lab and onto campus with another human being, while wearing a mask the whole time – we made thoughtful decisions regarding shifts and breaks. We only work 3 to 3 ½ hours at a time and we take individual breaks once an hour in our outdoor space just outside the lab.

Our little jungle oasis, just outside the Lab.

We each have dedicated sanitation supplies to make sure we disinfect before, during and after our shifts. We also decided that we would dispose of our own garbage at home, in order to further restrict access to our floor from non-Lab staff members, like housekeeping. Langsam Library, where the Lab is located, is also using a channel on Microsoft Teams to check-in and out while you are in the building. This not only let’s you know who else is in the building with you, who you might come across while in certain parts of the building (for example, the restroom), but will also give us a fairly accurate record to present to any contact tracing efforts in the future, if needed.

Overall, I think our approach to returning to the Lab has been a thoughtful and cautious one. From UC’s COVID procedures (wellness checks, facial coverings, social distancing, etc.) to our use of the cohort system and the small adjustments made to our workflow and setup, I feel very safe returning to the Lab and very fortunate to have the time/space to prep materials to take home.

Jessica and Catarina wrapping up their shift by sanitizing and taking their garbage with them – while also wearing their masks and distancing!

We are looking forward to expanding our plan in September to possibly include another cohort. Until then, make sure to check out our Instagram (@thePreservationLab) where you can see all the things we’re working on remotely and in the Lab.

Jessica Ebert [UCL] – Conservation Tech/Photographic Documentation Specialist/Student Supervisor

A Monster of a Treatment

When this mid-19^th century Treatise on Operative Surgery came to The Preservation Lab, little did we imagine the twists and turns the treatment would take. We certainly did not expect the treatment to turn into a Frankenstein’s monster, pulling inspiration from three different types of binding structures, although this monster found more successful results than Victor Frankenstein’s.

This 1844 full leather tight-back binding came to us from The Henry R. Winkler Center. The binding was in disarray with both the front and back boards having become fully detached, with only the back board remaining. Very few spine fragments remained, but there was clear evidence of false raised bands. The leather that remained on the spine and back board was severely red rotted. The textblock was sewn on recessed cords and remained beautifully intact. The textblock consists of 360 pages containing descriptions of surgical procedures, as well as 80 illustrated plates depicting some of these techniques.
Prior to any rebinding, the placement of the false raised bands was measured and recorded; the book’s spine was cleaned; the front and back flyleaves were mended and hinged; the back cover was housed in a polyester four-flap; new endsheets were sewn onto the textblock; and the spine was lined. Several of the linings attached will bring us to the first bookbinding structure that inspiration was pulled from…

The Split Board Binding: Because of the large size of the book, a split board binding attachment was chosen to add strength to the board attachment. After the spine of the textblock was lined with Japanese tissue and wheat starch paste, creating a reversible layer, a secondary spine lining with flanges was created out of linen and attached with Jade 403 PVA. This linen is an integral part of the split board structure, as it, along with the first endsheet and sewing supports, will create the “laminated flange” that will be pasted in between the two boards (hence, split board). This flange and split board structure can be seen in the uppermost book model in the stack pictured above.
Now that the book has the structure and stability of a split board binding, we can pull from another binding structure to attach the raised supports…

The “Baggy Back” Binding: A “baggy back” structure, also referred to as a conservation case, is what will allow the spine of the binding to be formed to the spine of the textblock, without being adhered directly to it. Another way to think about it is an alternative to a hollow tube structure. Sized linen was non-adhesively shaped over the spine of the textblock, and was pasted in between the split boards on top of the laminated flanges. The open book model in the image on the left shows what a typical “baggy back” structure looks prior to casing the textblock. Comparing that to how the linen can be integrated into the split board structure, we start to see our Frankenstein’s monster take shape.
To prep for the final stages of rebinding, some elements were added to stay true to the original structure of the book. False raised bands were cut and shaped out of 4-ply mat board to mimic the shape and location of the original false raised bands. Hollow tube segments were also attached in between the false raised bands.

These spine elements will finally be covered up using inspiration from one final book structure…
The Quarter Linen Binding: The book was decided to be finished as a quarter linen binding, instead of a more historical full leather or quarter leather binding for conservation purposes. The third model referenced, shown above, depicts the end result of this style of binding. In this structure the linen is stretched over the spine of the book to add the definition of the raised bands, or in the case of this treatment, false raised bands. The linen also allows for a strong attachment between the textblock and the boards. The hollow tubes laid between the bands allow for a better opening once the linen is in place.
During this treatment the linen was stretched over the spine of the book and onto the front and back boards, making sure the linen is securely and evenly applied around all of the spine elements. The book was then secured in a tying press to ensure definition of the bands.

Turn-ins were properly secured, and the linen was trimmed to the proper length on the boards. A brown book cloth was used to cover the remainder of the boards, the color chosen to mimic the color of the original leather used in the binding. The internal flanges from the split board binding structure (as seen in the right image above), along with the pastedowns, were applied to the inner boards. And no book is complete without a stamped title and a matching cloth covered clamshell.

Using three different book structures to plan this treatment does seem like a Frankenstein’s monster of a project, but the success of the treatment pays homage to the integration of bookbinding techniques we find in book structures throughout history. And this book will certainly look like no monster when it is on display for tours at The Winkler Center.

Kasie Janssen (PLCH) – Senior Conservation Technician
Photographic Documentation by Kasie Janssen & Jessica Ebert