Dining Table

[derekcohen]

Part 1 - design and construction

The brief is to build an 8-seater dining table to replace our existing 6-seater. We will retain the 6 vintage bentwood chairs, and I recently completed 2 (DC 09) chairs for use as carvers. Our taste in furniture runs towards the minimalistic, the clean lines of mid century designs from the 1930s, gentle curves. What is needed in a design is a way to link and blend the chairs with the table. In part this will be aided by the wood used for the table top: both the carvers and the top are Rock Maple. Another element will be the presence of the curves in the chairs, which will extend to the table.



The old table was 200 years old and came with us from from South Africa when we moved to Sydney 40 years ago. The top was Yellow Wood (which resembles an aged Maple), and the legs were Stinkwood (a dark wood). The latter will be represented by Jarrah.

Another need for the new table is that is must be knock-down. We plan to move home in about 18 months, downsizing when I retire. The new home is similar in size, but with less garden to manage. Being knock-down cannot impose on the design, and cannot impact on the rigidity of the construction. Today I will show you what I came up with.

The old table was 1350mm (53") long, 850mm (33 1/5") wide and 775mm (30 1/2") high.



The new table will be 1780mm (70") long, 1020mm wide (40"), and 760mm (30") high.



I found a photo of a table with similar proportions. This table has rectangular legs, but its silhouette creates the illusion that the legs are round, which will be the case in this build.



When I began test-building the leg-rail build, the legs were to have a 75mm (3") diameter with a rail of similar width. The legs ended up too chunky, and were subsequently reduced to 60mm (2 3/8") diameter. I am considering reducing the rails to 60mm as well (they are 75mm in the photos), but am concerned about a drop in rigidity. Having stated this, the rails are 30mm wide, Jarrah, and this is quite substantial.

So to the construction ...

​

The rails (or stretcher) are connected to the legs with loose tenons. The tenons are glued to the end of the rails, but left unglued when connected to the legs.

To facilitate the knock-down, a steel mechanical connector is being used ...



This requires the leg being tapped for a bolt, with the connector also screwed to the rails.

What follows is testing this out (some of the photos here have 75mm wide legs).

The 10mm x 55mm mortises in the legs were made with a router, and those in the rails made with a Domino.





The loose tenons were shaped on the router table using the new Woodpecker router bits  ...





The legs were also mortised for the rails, themselves, to mate the two flush. Here I have gone down to a depth of 5mm.





This looks fine here ...



... but in future I shall mortise to a depth of 7mm. Once the leg is turned, there is minimal beauty depth ...





With the connector (ignore the chewed look - this was the result of trial-and-error) ...



And here is the completed piece to judge the aesthetics of the sizing ...



Thoughts?

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[bobtskutter]

Thanks for sharing the proto-typing.

The legs on the carver chair (which is stunning) and the the legs on the older chairs appear narrower at the bottom.  Would the table leg benefit from a small taper?

Regards
bob

 

[derekcohen]

A few thoughts on this so far.

The aprons, per se, are not an issue as they will be connected to the table top, and together this creates a rigid construction.

My concern is to avoid any twist in the legs, which is complicated by the desire to have a knock-down construction for travel. I did consider other methods, such as joining the front rail/apron to the legs with a glued and pinned mortice and tenon (so the front and rear would be rigid units). Then just the side rails/aprons needed to be attached. My though was to do this with a sliding dovetail, which could be knocked out when the table was to be moved. Corner bracing would add the needed rigidity. It could be glued and permanent when the move is done.

Another was to forgo the knockdown design, and just go pinned mortice-and-tenon, with deeper tenons. Note that the tenons are 55mm x 10mm, and if 30mm into 60mm legs, this would be substantial.

Some have queried why I do not add a taper, splay or curve to the legs. There is a reason for the straight "cylinders". This is deliberate as it is the "quietest" design among chairs which are curvy, and near other furniture with curves. More curves will simply overwhelm. My aim is to find a balance, and that this will also allow the chairs to be featured. The overall design is, in my view, simple but elegant. Less is more here.

I cannot start any actual build for a couple of weeks as I shall be away. The aim of posting now was to create some discussion about design and construction. I find this helpful.

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[bobtskutter]

Am I right in thinking to take the table apart you'll have to remove the top from the rails / stretchers then unfasten the bolt.  The table would break down into 9 parts (4 legs, 2 rails, 2 stretchers, one top).

The 6'x3' dining table I had delivered had the rails / stretchers attached to the top with the metal bracket already installed.  The bracket presses into a kerf cut in the back of the rail / stretcher.  The legs have a "flat" spot on the portion closest to the metal bracket and the bolt pulls the leg tight against the rail / stretcher AND the metal bracket.  There are 5 parts (4 legs, one top) and the legs sit  "inside" the top which then goes in a box.

Regards
Bob

 

[derekcohen]

Am I right in thinking to take the table apart you'll have to remove the top from the rails / stretchers then unfasten the bolt.  The table would break down into 9 parts (4 legs, 2 rails, 2 stretchers, one top).

The 6'x3' dining table I had delivered had the rails / stretchers attached to the top with the metal bracket already installed.  The bracket presses into a kerf cut in the back of the rail / stretcher.  The legs have a "flat" spot on the portion closest to the metal bracket and the bolt pulls the leg tight against the rail / stretcher AND the metal bracket.  There are 5 parts (4 legs, one top) and the legs sit  "inside" the top which then goes in a box.

Regards
Bob

Bob, that was the plan, which has now changed. See below.

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[derekcohen]

Comments here, and elsewhere, have helped identify some of the risk issues, such as whether the leg joinery will hold up over time.

As much as I am designing for myself and not others, and have spent time thinking about the aesthetic I want, eventually I come to a few conclusions ... aided by my wife threatening me with divorce, burning my record collection, and selling my tools while I am hospitalised for my neurosis.

Decision #1: why the heck am I building a knock-down table when it will go though a doorway on edge? Full on mortise-and-tenon joinery, and no connectors, is also sooo much easier to build! And no worries about joinery strength. I think that I will stick with loose tenon joinery here as it allows one to orientate the grain in the tenons (avoiding run out). I am comfortable building integrated tenons, which would be stronger if the grain is straight.

Decision #2: She hates the straight legs. The first clue I should have picked up was the reduction in diameter. Okay, I am a slow learner. She wants a taper. So be it ... but I not her way (she is not a designer). The legs will be round, and receive a taper (probably from 65mm down to 35 or 40mm), and be splayed (probably at about 2-3 degrees). I need to draw this up and see what it looks like.

Decision #3: The table top remains the same. The legs will need to be brought in-board a little (to account for the splay), which will alter the size of the apron/subframe. I wish I had CAD to work this out. For me it is drawing to scale on an MDF panel. The top is attached to the aprons with buttons, allowing for side movement but keeping the top flat.

We are away for the weekend, so there is time to consider and re-consider. This build is not a sprint. Tables are really straight forward, except when they aren't.

Thoughts?

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Max Fracas]

[member=4358]derekcohen[/member]

Thanks for sharing the thoughts on straight leg vs taper. I’ve had similar discussions with my chief design critic. 

Your “I wish I had CAD” comment me wonder: Will we in the future have an AI-driven tool that lets us dictate a design, see the result, and then dictate revisions until we like what we see? Until that point, I appreciate you reminding me of the usefulness of a full-scale drawing. I sometimes think I should learn Sketchup or something else, but I always  slide back down the learning curve to paper and pencil.