Advice for first project: bathroom vanity

[noughtme]

I initially wanted to build a simple slab-side vanity using only butt joints and dowels, but I had second thoughts about that given that the 48" sections of 1 1/2" oak countertops I'm using weight over 50 lbs each. I don't want to do anything too complicated since this is my first serious furniture project, so I'm hoping that rabbets reinforced with Miller dowels should hold. The front drawer stretcher will be an oak 2 x 2 (or two 1 x 2s glued together) and the center dividers will be 1 x 3s, all joined to the sides and back with mortise and tenons. I don't know if the joints are really necessary on the small panel covering the space between the drawers, or if I would be better off not notching out the stretcher.

Prebuilt Blum Tandembox drawers and slides (from Ikea) will be going inside, and an above counter vessel sink will be going on top, which is why I need the space between the drawers. The faucet is wall mounted, so I only need a couple inches for the drain pipe.

I haven't started yet, so I can redesign if you guys have any suggestions or if I need to correct anything. I attached the Sketchup file if you want to have a look.

[attachthumb=2]
[attachthumb=3]
[attachthumb=4]
[attachthumb=5]

 

[jonny round boy]

I take it this is free-standing (or at least sitting on the floor) rather than wall-hung?

Personally, whilst I like it I think it's over-engineered.

At the moment, you have the sides running through the top, so that end grain is visible on the top surface. I'd change that, so the top sits onto the sides, with the end grain of the top visible on the sides. That way, you don't have end grain on the top - this is bad, as water can then sit on the end grain, and in oak it WILL get in, and black mould will develop easily. At least if it's on the sides you have a fighting chance of keeping it mould free. You wouldn't need to rebate this joint either, nor would you need the miller dowels (unless you want them for cosmetic effect?).

I'd also lift the bottom up slightly to clear the floor (again, assuming it's floor-standing):

[attachthumb=#]

As for the internals, as I said it's over-engineered but better that than under-engineered! You could slim down some of the components (the vertical panel between the 2 drawers, for example) but it won't do any harm not to.

These are just my thoughts on how I'd do it, but it's subjective and personal, so feel free to ignore all of the above...  [big grin]

 

[jvsteenb]

As much as I like your design, and appreciate the amount of thought that went into it, for a bathroom vanity I'd still re-desing to have a seamless top.
If you rabet the top instead of the sides, you still get to use the cool Miller dowels [smile].
Apart from that I think it's neat and well designed, it?s a nice mix of clean lines and decent engineering.  Kudos!

Just my ?0.02

Regards,

Job

 

[mattfc]

I initially wanted to build a simple slab-side vanity using only butt joints and dowels, but I had second thoughts about that given that the 48" sections of 1 1/2" oak countertops I'm using weight over 50 lbs each. I don't want to do anything too complicated since this is my first serious furniture project, so I'm hoping that rabbets reinforced with Miller dowels should hold. The front drawer stretcher will be an oak 2 x 2 (or two 1 x 2s glued together) and the center dividers will be 1 x 3s, all joined to the sides and back with mortise and tenons. I don't know if the joints are really necessary on the small panel covering the space between the drawers, or if I would be better off not notching out the stretcher.

It would be useful to know what tools you have also to provide advice, any pocket hole jigs, Domino etc? I concur with others comments re not exposing the end grain, keep the top a continous surface, it will last longer, avoid damp (if properly sealed), no gaps for dirt to get in etc.

 

[Daviddubya]

Assuming this is a base cabinet, you need not be overly concerned about strength.  A rabbeted frame, with a 1/4" back, a "nailing strip" across the top and screwed to wall studs will hold far more than a 50 pound top.

I agree with the other posts about rabbeting the top and placing the bottom shelf about 3-4" off the floor.  Use a toe kick for added rigidity of the box.

1X material for the face frame, using pocket hole joints will be fine - a good excuse to get a Kreg jig if you don't already have one.

Good luck.

 

[jvsteenb]

I actually like the fact that it's a tad over-engineered, especially for a first time project. Strength-wise it'll be more or less bulletproof, and I think it's better to learn to downgrade to "acceptable", then learn to upgrade.
It's supposed to be made out of solid oak right? So there's lots of challenges to make it waterproof and looking sharp.
Unless money is absolutely unimportant you don't want to goof up using this kind of material, so you'll have to think, rethink, design, redesing, measure, measure,measure, and then make that cut.
A project like this could of course be constructed much simpler, and still be acceptable from a rational point of view.
But the potential gain in experience/knowledge/proficiency and confidence is huge.

Again, just my Euro 0.02 .....

Regards,

Job

 

[noughtme]

At the moment, you have the sides running through the top, so that end grain is visible on the top surface. I'd change that, so the top sits onto the sides, with the end grain of the top visible on the sides.... You wouldn't need to rebate this joint either, nor would you need the miller dowels....

I knew that was the first thing someone would point out. Your drawing is basically my original conception. So butt joints all around would be enough to hold this thing together? I've never built anything this heavy before (okay, I've never built anything other than plywood bookshelves), which is why i figured I'd at least need to use dowels. If it would hold together well enough without dowels or rabbets, I'd gladly save myself the trouble.

The reason I had the end grain visible on top is because that's what i thought made the most sense structurally if i was going to use rabbets AND dowels. I figured the dowels should be horizontally oriented to be most effective. Also, the front cover panel is so thick, because it's the same material as the sides and top. If i had a band saw, I'd probably resaw it. Same goes for the drawer fronts. Would a 1 x 2 be good enough for the front stretcher?

Everyone seems to agree about no end grain on the top, so I'll take that to be a good idea. I also don't mind raising the bottom off the floor. Don't know about a toe kick though, purely from an aesthetic point of view. I guess I could put it at the back for reinforcement. The vanity will be totally freestanding with no nailing strip. The wall behind it is covered with glass tile from floor to ceiling and I don't want to have to think about drilling fasteners into it.

As for tools at my disposal, I'll be making all the cuts with a TS 75, and my OF 1400 for rabbets (if necessary) and mortises and tenons, with help from chisels and hand saws. No, Domino, no Kreg jig, and no table saw. Pocket screws would make this really easy to put together, but I'd prefer to stick with glue-only joints, aesthetically, especially since I just picked up a set of 36" and 48" Jorgensen Cabinet Master clamps. I already have a bag of Miller dowels lying around, so I could throw a few in for good measure, but the one exposed side (right side faces a wall) might look nicer without them.

 

[danrush]

My only thought is that the top, drawers, and base appear to span about 48" with no center support.  Probably not a problem with a table or other furniture, but sometimes folks tend to lean on a vanity to stare at themselves in the mirror.  With the static load of the unit and drawers, plus the sink on the slab, plus some one leaning on the c-top, could be something to consider.  I've seen even well supported stone sag a bit.

Dan

 

[tDot]

Another benefit to running your top full width is that the weight of the top is transferred directly through to the sides.  The dowels can be used in a vertical orientation to help locate the top and sides.  Not in a load bearing capacity, which they would be, if they were in a horizontal orientation.

 

[noughtme]

Another benefit to running your top full width is that the weight of the top is transferred directly through to the sides.  The dowels can be used in a vertical orientation to help locate the top and sides.  Not in a load bearing capacity, which they would be, if they were in a horizontal orientation.

I was so set on using through dowels, I didn't consider using them vertically as locating pins. Would have saved me a couple hundred bucks on the 48" clamps I felt compelled to purchase, although I'm sure I can find a use for them once I start finger jointing or dovetailing. All the Miller dowel videos show them being inserted after glueing.

As to load bearing capacity, I put a few numbers in the Sagulator, and even with 100lbs in each drawer, 300lbs of person on top, and a 20lb sink, it's only showing 0.01" of deflection across the full width. That's probably an overestimate, since half the load of the drawers would be carried directly by the sides (and it's been too long since college physics to factor in the back). It was more the 1 x 2 or 2 x 2 stretcher I was concerned about.

Depending on the numbers, it's showing up to a 1/10th of an inch. Might it be wise to uncouple the top from the drawer stretcher? That way the stretcher only supports the drawers, and the top supports "lean."