I;m building a table with a top that's 1 1/2" thick, 68" long and 42" wide.
I want to attach 5" thick legs but don't want to use the usual skirts to do
it. So, I've been thinking about routing out 1/3 - 3/4" on the underside of
the table for the legs and then pinning through the top into the legs so the
pins will show to for effect. Any thoughts on where I would go wrong?
You're right about the table being heavy. Good catch on the "not lifting".
I'm really looking for something very simple looking and yet unusual. The
table shown on the URL are too ornate. That's why I was wanting to do away
with the skirting. However, you make a good point, "The railes are there
for a reason" and duely noted.
"Frank McVey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Ah hae ma doots, laddie. The joint you suggest isn't mechanically strong.
> This is going to be a pretty heavy table, so people aren't going to lift
it.
> If it needs moving, they'll try to push it, putting a large turning moment
> on those fairly weak joints. The rails are there for a reason!
>
> If you're not into rails, another traditional style would be to make a
> simple refectory-type base. Something like:
>
> http://www.oak-furniture-uk.com/oak%20refectory%20tables.htm
>
> The construction of this isn't too obvious from the photo, but the legs
are
> M&T'd into the foot. The top of the end trestle is a slightly smaller
> version of the foot, and there are usually 2 longitudinal stretchers: one
> between the lower ends of the trestles, and one between the upper ends,
> supporting the top. The stretchers often have their tenons run right
> through the trestle ends, which are then secured by wedges. Nice talking
> point, and it allows the table to be easily taken apart for transpot.
>
> This construction lends itself more to a long narrow table: Your table is
> pretty wide, so you'd want to consider widening the feet so that the table
> is less likely to tip if someone puts their weight on one of the long top
> edges.
>
> The top is often held on using slotted steel plates to allow for the top
> swelling and shrinking.
>
> HTH
>
> Frank
>
>
>
> "Phil" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > I;m building a table with a top that's 1 1/2" thick, 68" long and 42"
> wide.
> > I want to attach 5" thick legs but don't want to use the usual skirts to
> do
> > it. So, I've been thinking about routing out 1/3 - 3/4" on the
underside
> of
> > the table for the legs and then pinning through the top into the legs so
> the
> > pins will show to for effect. Any thoughts on where I would go wrong?
> >
> >
>
>
Ah hae ma doots, laddie. The joint you suggest isn't mechanically strong.
This is going to be a pretty heavy table, so people aren't going to lift it.
If it needs moving, they'll try to push it, putting a large turning moment
on those fairly weak joints. The rails are there for a reason!
If you're not into rails, another traditional style would be to make a
simple refectory-type base. Something like:
http://www.oak-furniture-uk.com/oak%20refectory%20tables.htm
The construction of this isn't too obvious from the photo, but the legs are
M&T'd into the foot. The top of the end trestle is a slightly smaller
version of the foot, and there are usually 2 longitudinal stretchers: one
between the lower ends of the trestles, and one between the upper ends,
supporting the top. The stretchers often have their tenons run right
through the trestle ends, which are then secured by wedges. Nice talking
point, and it allows the table to be easily taken apart for transpot.
This construction lends itself more to a long narrow table: Your table is
pretty wide, so you'd want to consider widening the feet so that the table
is less likely to tip if someone puts their weight on one of the long top
edges.
The top is often held on using slotted steel plates to allow for the top
swelling and shrinking.
HTH
Frank
"Phil" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I;m building a table with a top that's 1 1/2" thick, 68" long and 42"
wide.
> I want to attach 5" thick legs but don't want to use the usual skirts to
do
> it. So, I've been thinking about routing out 1/3 - 3/4" on the underside
of
> the table for the legs and then pinning through the top into the legs so
the
> pins will show to for effect. Any thoughts on where I would go wrong?
>
>
Um. Forgot to mention in my other post that the style I was referring to is
item 4 on the url given.
"Phil" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I;m building a table with a top that's 1 1/2" thick, 68" long and 42"
wide.
> I want to attach 5" thick legs but don't want to use the usual skirts to
do
> it. So, I've been thinking about routing out 1/3 - 3/4" on the underside
of
> the table for the legs and then pinning through the top into the legs so
the
> pins will show to for effect. Any thoughts on where I would go wrong?
>
>
Those cannon legs w/stretcher would surely keep the legs from heading north
and south and a nice look too.If the table weren't so long you could
probably get away with knees and gussets,easy to breakdown and move as well.
"Frank McVey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Um. Forgot to mention in my other post that the style I was referring to
is
> item 4 on the url given.
>
>
>
> "Phil" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > I;m building a table with a top that's 1 1/2" thick, 68" long and 42"
> wide.
> > I want to attach 5" thick legs but don't want to use the usual skirts to
> do
> > it. So, I've been thinking about routing out 1/3 - 3/4" on the
underside
> of
> > the table for the legs and then pinning through the top into the legs so
> the
> > pins will show to for effect. Any thoughts on where I would go wrong?
> >
> >
>
>
In article <[email protected]>, "Phil" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> You're right about the table being heavy. Good catch on the "not lifting".
> I'm really looking for something very simple looking and yet unusual. The
> table shown on the URL are too ornate. That's why I was wanting to do away
> with the skirting. However, you make a good point, "The railes are there
> for a reason" and duely noted.
What about using bed bolts through the top into the ends of the legs,
like you would attach the rails of a bed to the corner posts?
Think I would opt for a wedged tennon. The top is thick enough and the leg
beefy enough for a M&T joint which hopefully will withstand any racking
forces placed on the table when someone moves it. Splaying the legs out
slightly would also help prevent any racking on the joint.
This type of joinery is often used on step stools and is plenty strong.
Bob S.
"Phil" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I;m building a table with a top that's 1 1/2" thick, 68" long and 42"
wide.
> I want to attach 5" thick legs but don't want to use the usual skirts to
do
> it. So, I've been thinking about routing out 1/3 - 3/4" on the underside
of
> the table for the legs and then pinning through the top into the legs so
the
> pins will show to for effect. Any thoughts on where I would go wrong?
>
>