Posts: 6,107
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: Central Kentucky
I am gearing up to build a walnut dining table. The top will be 32” x 64”. I built the guy some slab furniture with thick tops and he wants this table to match the basic style. We are planning on straight legs about 2.5” x 2.5”. This will be a basic mortise and tenon for the leg to apron construction.
My supplier has 4/4 and 8/4, but does not have 6/4. I plan on getting 8/4 walnut for the top, but feel that 1.75” to 2” may look chunky for the top. I can resaw some of the thickness off, or I can create a taper on the underside to make the top lighter. I feel that 1.25” thick top would look best.
Question #1: I can get 2.75” square legs online, but at over $24 a bft. I can mill these down to the necessary dimensions. Or I can get 8/4 walnut from my supplier at $10 bft and glue up the legs. I am not against paying the higher cost for the online legs, just want to hear some opinions.
Question #2: How would you handle the top? For the dimensions given, what thickness would you shoot for?
Posts: 12,888
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2010
Location: Lewiston, NY
8/4 is awfully heavy for a tabletop. You can visually lighten it by cutting a bevel on the underside, as you said, but it's still going to be heavy. On the other hand, at only 32 x 64" it's not very big, so I would leave it at whatever the 8/4 planes down to and just bevel the underside to visually lighten it.
For square cross section legs I'd glue up my own. I personally do not care for quarter sawn walnut so I would try to find plain sawn stock, glue it up, and then glue a 1/8" veneer of plain sawn on the two QS faces. That will cover the glue joint and give consistent grain on all faces.
John
Posts: 6,107
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: Central Kentucky
10-27-2021, 01:05 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-27-2021, 01:06 PM by Scoony.)
(10-27-2021, 12:44 PM)jteneyck Wrote: For square cross section legs I'd glue up my own. I personally do not care for quarter sawn walnut so I would try to find plain sawn stock, glue it up, and then glue a 1/8" veneer of plain sawn on the two QS faces. That will cover the glue joint and give consistent grain on all faces.
John
Thanks. I actually prefer QS walnut for legs, but was not thinking about veneering over the glue joints. I am going to give that a test and see what the results look like.
Posts: 14,856
Threads: 10
Joined: Jan 2010
Location: southeastern VA
At 8/4 thickness in the middle of the top, I doubt that you would have any sagging issues - so no need for a rib under the center length.
How thick are the other slab tops that you made for him? That answer may affect how much you want to "lighten" the feel of the top.
Once you have the top and bottom flattened, you can chamfer the underside of the edge all the way around at the edge thickness that you have chosen.
The shallower you make the chamfer angle, the lighter the top will appear (for the same edge thickness).
Depending on the setback for the aprons, you could chamfer back to the outer edge of the apron and then cut a flat rebate for the apron. That way, the added thickness of the top inside the apron will help keep things square.
Just remember to allow for the different expansion and contraction of the cross grain top in the narrower dimension versus that of the apron/stretcher. Of course, if you are somehow using QS 8/4 for the top, then never mind about that size change issue.
"the most important safety feature on any tool is the one between your ears." - Ken Vick
A wish for you all: May you keep buying green bananas.
Posts: 6,107
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: Central Kentucky
(10-27-2021, 01:32 PM)iclark Wrote: At 8/4 thickness in the middle of the top, I doubt that you would have any sagging issues - so no need for a rib under the center length.
How thick are the other slab tops that you made for him? That answer may affect how much you want to "lighten" the feel of the top.
Once you have the top and bottom flattened, you can chamfer the underside of the edge all the way around at the edge thickness that you have chosen.
The shallower you make the chamfer angle, the lighter the top will appear (for the same edge thickness).
Depending on the setback for the aprons, you could chamfer back to the outer edge of the apron and then cut a flat rebate for the apron. That way, the added thickness of the top inside the apron will help keep things square.
Just remember to allow for the different expansion and contraction of the cross grain top in the narrower dimension versus that of the apron/stretcher. Of course, if you are somehow using QS 8/4 for the top, then never mind about that size change issue. Thanks, the other tops were somewhere around 1-5/8” For the apron to top, I have done them several ways in the past. The console table and end tables I built for him used wooden cleats with groves cut into the apron. I will probably go that route.
Posts: 7,421
Threads: 1
Joined: Sep 2005
10-27-2021, 03:43 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-27-2021, 03:45 PM by Cooler.)
You might consider welded legs. Either custom or from a welded leg supplier. It makes a good look. And it will be very robust.
https://www.google.com/search?q=live+edg...=775&dpr=1
And a pretty nice article on the subject:
https://www.blacktailstudio.com/blog/how...wood-table
No animals were injured or killed in the production of this post.
Posts: 2,332
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2006
Location: virginia beach VA
I recently made a desk for a friend. IIRC, we went with 8/4 top, but 12/4 legs , because legs much thinner looked out of proportion. As iclark says, you can always chamfer the underside of the top to lighten the look if you want to go that route, but I would draw it to scale to see whether you think the legs look too spindly depending on the thickness of the top. I know many prefer solid wood for the legs, but I think that is more of a woodworker preference than a client desire, unless you have a very particular client. I think most folks would have trouble noticing the difference between solid stock and glued up stock for the legs - most of the time, the top draws the most attention since they get the full light in the room, and the legs are in the shadows, and with a stain, it would be hard to see the glue up.
Posts: 1,674
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2003
(10-27-2021, 10:38 AM)Scoony Wrote: Question #2: How would you handle the top? For the dimensions given, what thickness would you shoot for?
IMHO - Table thickness; 1-3/8" to 1-1/2" (max).
In the Gallery section of my website is a dining table I built a while back that might help you visualize the thickness/size ratio. It is 1-1/2" thick but quite a bit larger that your project.
https://www.dmwoodworks.net/new-page
Posts: 6,107
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: Central Kentucky
(10-28-2021, 12:05 AM)Don_M Wrote: IMHO - Table thickness; 1-3/8" to 1-1/2" (max).
In the Gallery section of my website is a dining table I built a while back that might help you visualize the thickness/size ratio. It is 1-1/2" thick but quite a bit larger that your project.
https://www.dmwoodworks.net/new-page
Thanks. Great looking table.
Posts: 102
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2021
When I made a walnut table, I had to use what a I have on hand: 4/4. So when planed both sides, the boards ended up 3/4. Of course that looks too light, even though the strength is sufficient. To make the top look heavier, I glued a 3/4 x 2 strip all along the outer edge. So the finished tabletop appears to be 1.5 thick. On the ends, to allow for seasonal expansion, the strips were made up of end-grain, so the expansion would be the same.
|
