Best way to attach table top when wood movement isn't an issue

[smorgasbord]

Jon Peters has a nice simple low bench:=CMLKJoWkmyaChUok

But, even though the design has the grain of the top and base running in the same direction, he uses traditional buttons to attach the top, which aren't necessary since both top and base will move the same amount.

So, what's the best - or at least better - way to attach the top? I'm thinking buttons are more complex to build and install, and may not hold securely over time.

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

My first thought was, believe it or not, pocket screws. The legs are thick, so easy to put a pocket screw on the inside leg face going up into the also thick top. Maybe do 4 - one nearish (not too near) each corner. They really only take stress when you lift the bench by the top to move it around.

But, that's not elegant enough for some. Any better/easier options?

 

[rmhinden]

Well, I think the buttons he made are quite nice and match the bench.  Much better, in my opinion, than using pocket screws.  It is a very nice detail.

Bob

 

[smorgasbord]

Why not just a block of wood with a horizontal and a vertical screw? Making the buttons and making the slots is work for nothing as far as I can tell when wood movement doesn't have to be accounted for. And still uses a screw.
He's already using a long lag bolt to attach the legs to the stretcher, so it's not like he's looking for a hardware-less solution.

 

[Michael Kellough]

If making something fine enough that someone is gonna wanna look underneath, I’d use drawbored mortise and tenons.

 

[Crazyraceguy]

Personally, I think the "more elegant" choice is the way to go. Once you have spent the money on wood like that, I wouldn't want to short-cut anything. I'm more likely to go with the elegant solution most of the time anyway.
I didn't watch the video, but I assume by "buttons" you are referring to blocks with a tongue, that goes into a slot?
I usually do a similar thing with a Domino.

 

[smorgasbord]

I didn't watch the video, but I assume by "buttons" you are referring to blocks with a tongue, that goes into a slot?
I usually do a similar thing with a Domino.

Yeah, they look like this:
[attachimg=1]

He's got 8 of them for this bench.  Just a plain tongue-less block with 2 screws instead of 1 would work just fine, and no need to have 8, Jeez.

 

[Michael Kellough]

A “button” that is a dovetailed tenon in the side of the leg (flush with the top of the leg) would also be nice.
Similar to putting a Domino flush with the top but better looking.

 

[Crazyraceguy]

My blocks are effectively the same thing, just Domino mortices in them and the aprons. A 6mm Domino becomes the tongue.

 

[rvieceli]

There’s no guarantee that the top and the base won’t move independently. The top is bubinga and the base is padauk.

The top is going to move more across the width than the length but the length will probably still move a bit.

Why wouldn’t you take the steps to account for some movement after expending the time and energy to construct a piece.

Ron

 

[smorgasbord]

There’s no guarantee that the top and the base won’t move independently. The top is bubinga and the base is padauk.

Did you look up the expansion modulus of those two woods? They're practically identical. Any movemement across that 18"-20" width (guessing) is going to be so close with those two species that even gluing the two together wouldn't be a problem. At all. You might get more movement between flatsawn and quartersawn boards of the same species glued together.

The top is going to move more across the width than the length but the length will probably still move a bit.

First, wood doesn't change length with humidity. Second, wood is actually more stable in length with temperature changes than most metals. Third, both top and base are oriented lengthwise, so any microscopic change would be identical.

Why wouldn’t you take the steps to account for some movement after expending the time and energy to construct a piece.

It's wasted effort, and arguably results in a weaker attachment.

 

[onocoffee]

no need to have 8, Jeez.

"Go Big or Go Home."
- Jon Peters

 

[squall_line]

The face grain on the legs is running the same direction as the face grain on the top, but if you look at the ends of those legs, at least one looks pretty close to the pith and may not expand and contract as expected.

Is it a "signature" construction method for him?  Meaning, is that one of the marks of a work that he has produced?  If so, why not just keep making them the way he's made them?

 

[smorgasbord]

The face grain on the legs is running the same direction as the face grain on the top, but if you look at the ends of those legs, at least one looks pretty close to the pith and may not expand and contract as expected.

Differing expansion/contraction is not an issue with this bench's construction, no matter the quartersawn/flatsawn nature of the boards.

Is it a "signature" construction method for him?  Meaning, is that one of the marks of a work that he has produced?  If so, why not just keep making them the way he's made them?

Because it's more time and effort than is needed for something almost no-one will ever see. And anyone looking at the construction is either going to be perplexed at those 8 large buttons or be knowledgable to know they weren't needed.

It's apparent to me he went with the buttons because for some constructions you do need to accommodate wood movement and so that was just his default without really thinking about it. I did post 3 alternatives in his comment section, and while he didn't like 2 of them, he ignored the third, which is really just a simpler/smaller button to make and install that doesn't need tongues, rounding of the tongue, biscuit slots, etc.