# No longer remotely Shaker(ish) dining table



## Steve Maskery (30 Jan 2020)

I've been without a proper dining table for several years, making do with an old and small, octagonal, mahogany table that always stood in my grandparents' window with a vase of flowers on it. It's fine for one, OK for two but too cosy for comfort with any more.

I've had a design in my head for quite a while, but had never got round to realising it.











Last year I saw a table top for sale. Nice pippy oak, too big for my needs, but, I thought, it would save me some work preparing large boards with my small machines. So I bought it.

Big, big mistake. It was badly jointed, slathered in a horrible poly finish, patched in a couple of places and very, very cupped. It also arrived damaged. Nothing that would affect me, but it's an indication of the situation. It was going to be more work in putting this right that buying virgin timber. Plus, I paid far too much money for it. Ah well, we live and learn.

The good news is that it is very pretty.

So the first task was to cut down the centre, to see where the Dominoes were, and therefore where it was, and was not, safe to crosscut. I could get a nice, quite well-balanced top, 1400mm long.

The next task was to straighten up the balance of the grain. The two boards were quite well balanced at one end






but miles out at the other.






So I cut out a long thin triangle to bring the two haves more into balance.






I could now see that I could get a top slightly over 800mm wide.

All this cutting was done with my tracksaw swapping between rip and cross-cut blades as necessary. Good job it has a FastFix feature, it really is a quick job and stops me from thinking that it's not worth changing the blade again just for one cut. I ended up with two decently-matched boards 1400 x 400mm.






However, they were still far from flat. I do have a drum sander, but it is not up to the task of handling boards of this size. To cut a long story short, I rang my woody pal Andy and asked if I could use his big drum sander and he very kindly agreed to help me out. If you are reading this, Andy, thank you very much indeed.






It took two of us two hours to get them flat and uniform. The bad news is that we have removed 4mm of wood (down from 32mm to 28mm – still a generous thickness for a table top), but one board has become slightly more heavily pippied (is that even a word?) than it was, while the other has got a bit less pippy than it was, so the contrast between the two halves has increased.

There are a couple of places where there is a very large difference in figure between the two boards. One I can't do anything about, the other I can. More tomorrow.

Possibly.


----------



## Trigs (30 Jan 2020)

cracking figure on the top


----------



## gasman (31 Jan 2020)

Beautiful figuring on that timber and you've done a fabulous job of matching up the pippiness
Is there anyone else who is concerned about the huge stress on the two joints on either end between the vertical pieces and the splayed legs? I cannot see how that joint won't be under huge stress all the time?? Just my ha'penyworth and hope I'm wrong 
BW Mark


----------



## Steve Maskery (31 Jan 2020)

That is an important consideration, certainly. It will be a gert big sliding dovetail. I might make the feet a tad more vertical.
Three-legged Shaker tables sometimes had a metal plate under the column holding the three dovetails together. That is another possibility.


----------



## MikeG. (31 Jan 2020)

I'll be watching this one closely. It looks an interesting project. 

But Shaker? I mean "Shaker" gets added to all sorts of simple panel work as though no-one else ever did panels, but I've never seen "Shaker" added to such an ornate table leg arrangement as that. Shaker furniture was all about stripped back simplicity. I may well be wrong, but if anyone can post an image of a genuine Shaker table that looks anything like this I'll be mightily surprised.


----------



## Steve Maskery (31 Jan 2020)

Back in September I went on holiday to Maine, USA. We visited a Thomas Moser shop. There was a massive (12-seater) extending dining table in cherry. The ends were flat like a refectory table, rather than tripodic(?), and they were 3 peices joined in a Y shape. I assume there were splines inside, or big tenons.
The shape is very similar, a modern interpretation of classic Shaker.





Mike, I took inspiration from tables like this:


----------



## That would work (31 Jan 2020)

That's an interesting development of a shaker table known (as I'm sure you know) as a candle stand.
Thing is they were quite small round tables about 450 diameter and were constructed as per your drawing. Do you not think the stresses imposed on a larger table would require further support under the top though? The joint between the top of the column and the cross piece looks very vulnerable 
The sliding dovetails that are used between the feet and the column? Maybe OK if scaled up appropriately... they did often put a metal plate on the bottom of these but my guess is that that was to back up the glue or no glue. Not sure that it added much strength.


----------



## Steve Maskery (31 Jan 2020)

I saw an advert for a Shaker Bar Stool once! They'll be making Shaker condoms next...


----------



## Steve Maskery (31 Jan 2020)

That would work":3lcao150 said:


> The joint between the top of the column and the cross piece looks very vulnerable



It's a spiggot 40mm dia and 30mm long. I could make it longer by beefing up the cross-piece in the centre (anyone know what that part is called?).


----------



## AndyT (31 Jan 2020)

Interesting design and thought processes. I shall follow closely.

On the way that the pippiness increased and decreased, I think it's clear in retrospect. Your two boards are bookmatched, so their surfaces would have been together in the log. If you imagine the knots are roughly conical, removing wood from the upper board takes the surface up to a thinner part of the cones, so they dominate less. On the lower board, sanding takes you down to where the knots are thicker and make a higher proportion of the area.


----------



## That would work (31 Jan 2020)

Yep on the small round tables it was indeed a through round tenon into the cross member and wedged.
I recon you'll need something more substantial though considering the leverage from the edge of the top.


----------



## Steve Maskery (31 Jan 2020)

That is exactly what has happened, Andy.

I always get a bit worried when people describe something as "interesting"...


----------



## MikeG. (31 Jan 2020)

Seriously, Steve, I'm worried about every aspect of the design of the undercarriage of this table. I simply don't see it being strong enough. The first person who leans on it to push themselves up out of their chair is going to wreck it. But don't take my word for it.......drill a tight fitting hole for a dowel into the middle of an offcut the same width as your table, glue in the dowel, and when it's dry clamp the dowel in a vice with the offcut sticking out. Apply some force to the end of the piece of wood and see how much it moves.

If you beef up that top joint with some brackets, for instance, all the forces from someone leaning on the table edge are going to end up in that sliding dovetail in the long grain of the leg. What's that going to be like in 5 or 10 years time?


----------



## AJB Temple (31 Jan 2020)

I have often wondered why early designs of small single column tables adopted the bird cage pattern - perhaps it was to deal with tilting forces between the column and the brace.


----------



## That would work (31 Jan 2020)

I would be thinking about leaving a length of square on the tops of the columns to allow for an edge upwards piece that could be bridled into the top of the column. Or maybe two pieces housed onto the sides of the columns. Bridle is tidier I guess.


----------



## Steve Maskery (31 Jan 2020)

You are all getting me worried now - which, if I am wrong, is a good thing.




AJB Temple":2p7wrwdl said:


> I have often wondered why early designs of small single column tables adopted the bird cage pattern - perhaps it was to deal with tilting forces between the column and the brace.



Have you got a picture, please?


----------



## Jacob (31 Jan 2020)

If i really wanted :roll: to do a big heavy table based on the delicate little Shaker 3 legged round table I'd simply drop the board on to two 3 legged similar, and get rid of the clumsy stretcher. You'd have 6 legs but a more logical and stable structure. You'd still need to think about the top joint, possible metal, or 3 brackets to match the three legs?
I've seen similar in principle, where a heavy top is rested on two saw-horse type of thing, each with three legs and inherently stable.


----------



## That would work (31 Jan 2020)

Look at this 'Hancock' bench. A simple shaker piece which use braces under the seat, going in a different direction true, but something similar would fit in to the style of your table.


----------



## Steve Maskery (31 Jan 2020)

That would work":3sek26oa said:


> Look at this 'Hancock' bench. A simple shaker piece which use braces under the seat, going in a different direction true, but something similar would fit in to the style of your table.



The trouble with that is that I really don't like it.

I might have to re-think this


----------



## That would work (31 Jan 2020)

...just the braces? Won't really be seen that much. Fit them into the tops of your columns I was thinking.


----------



## AJB Temple (31 Jan 2020)

Hi Steve, Annoyingly the iPhone picture of the best image is too large (this forum is a bit archaic in picture handling) but the picture attached is from two birdcage tables circa 1700. These from my bible on oak furniture: Oak Furniture - The British Tradition by Vincent Chinnery. 

There are a number of ways used by the old craftsmen to joint tables to legs. However most dining tables (refectory or one of the multitude of names) had more substantial leg structures. It is worth remembering that back in medieval times is was common for house staff to sleep both on and under tables, hence structure and balance was critical. My medieval refectory table is getting on for 4 inches thick on the top and the legs and braces are what one might call sturdy.


----------



## Steve Maskery (31 Jan 2020)

Thank you.
The column I have drawn is 95mm diameter at the bottom, the dovetails can be anything up to 30mm long.

I have another design in my head. I might draw it up and see if floats my boat more.

That Moser table seemed sturdy enough. Those end structures were ex-2". 45mm I suppose.

The thing is, I don't really want a normal 4-legged table, I want something more interesting.


----------



## Jacob (31 Jan 2020)

Talking of 3 legged saw horses table supports (well I was anyway) I first saw one in the Rijksmuseum in a dolls house (I think). Couldn't find a snap but found this instead, which I thought was interesting https://www.canvas.co.com/creations/2957
PS Talking of Amsterdam, just remembered (trying to ignore) today is Brexit day. :roll: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9jEuHbB0GQ


----------



## AndyT (31 Jan 2020)

Steve, I hope these might help with your thinking. Both shaker originals. 

This table is 20 feet long but does give a precedent for more than one base unit.






And this one is a bit more conventional


----------



## Racers (31 Jan 2020)

I am with the crowd here Steve, the joint between the top and legs isn't strong enough.

It needs to be T or Y shaped to spread the load.



Pete


----------



## Steve Maskery (31 Jan 2020)

Well, when so many experienced people, whose opinions I (normally!  ) respect tell me I'm wrong, I should listen.

So I've beefed it up at both ends, The leg is now 25mm taller at the dovetail end and the top rails are now 95mm deep, set as a bridle joint.

What do you think? Click to enlarge:


----------



## Jacob (31 Jan 2020)

Remove stretcher and add a 3rd leg to each post and you are there!


----------



## Woody2Shoes (31 Jan 2020)

AJB Temple":1rx5zeo7 said:


> Hi Steve, Annoyingly the iPhone picture of the best image is too large (this forum is a bit archaic in picture handling) but the picture attached is from two birdcage tables circa 1700. These from my bible on oak furniture: Oak Furniture - The British Tradition by Vincent Chinnery.
> 
> There are a number of ways used by the old craftsmen to joint tables to legs. However most dining tables (refectory or one of the multitude of names) had more substantial leg structures. It is worth remembering that back in medieval times is was common for house staff to sleep both on and under tables, hence structure and balance was critical. My medieval refectory table is getting on for 4 inches thick on the top and the legs and braces are what one might call sturdy.



I've always thought that the birdcage mechanism was to allow the table top to be rotated - a sort of 'lazy susan' idea when serving afternoon tea - as well as tilted (to save space when not being used to serve afternoon tea).

http://blog.thakehamfurniture.co.uk/201 ... ge-tables/

There's a good video of Roy Underhill making the sliding dovetails for a "Hancock Pedestal Table" which I think is the sort of design that might have influenced the designer of what influenced Steve (!) https://www.pbs.org/video/the-woodwrigh ... tal-table/

Here's a design (a bit chunky but could be refined) for a dining table which is essentially a pair these pedestals supporting one tabletop:

https://www.barkerandstonehouse.co.uk/d ... 797-91502/ 

Cheers, W2S


----------



## MikeG. (31 Jan 2020)

Well that top is better Steve, certainly. I'm still sceptical about the legs. How about extending it downwards in an upside-down finial, and putting a strap around it, like a ferrule? That would have the duel benefit of getting the joint away from the end of the vertical post, and tying it together to resist the grain splitting if it came under pressure. I also just think it needs to be chunkier.

This leg design is something I would consider marginal, and if I were making it I would want to reassure myself by making a reasonable mock-up before embarking on the real thing. If that turns out OK, then crack on.

Edit....moving the stretcher away from the joints between the posts and the feet would improve the strength of the latter. If you added a third foot in its place you could eliminate the stretcher altogether, so long as you don't drag the table around.


----------



## AJB Temple (31 Jan 2020)

Well - the old original birdcage tables I have seen in real life have neither rotated nor tilted. That is not to say that they didn't at one time I suppose. They certainly were making rotating candle stands to go up and down on a screw at that time, and also more rudimentary candle and rush taper holders that could be adjusted for height. 

For anyone who has the book, look at Figure 3.184 on page 297. Very high quality birdcage with four turned posts and arches, and an elaborate through centre post. Clearly not designed to tilt in that case.


----------



## D_W (31 Jan 2020)

Steve Maskery":2lcn9jqb said:


> I saw an advert for a Shaker Bar Stool once! They'll be making Shaker condoms next...



I'm waiting for the Tesla Model 3, Shaker edition. Aged cherry paint with virtue signaling turn indicators.


----------



## D_W (31 Jan 2020)

MikeG.":ufuesdzw said:


> I'll be watching this one closely. It looks an interesting project.
> 
> But Shaker? I mean "Shaker" gets added to all sorts of simple panel work as though no-one else ever did panels, but I've never seen "Shaker" added to such an ornate table leg arrangement as that. Shaker furniture was all about stripped back simplicity. I may well be wrong, but if anyone can post an image of a genuine Shaker table that looks anything like this I'll be mightily surprised.



https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/shak/hd_shak.htm

There were some shaker bits with turned elements and curves, but they were probably the minority. Not sure if the shakers and quakers at the time knew they were building a strong brand for future boutique furniture makers (some of the shaker makers in maine charge nosebleed prices - snooty and I guess targeted at doofus customers who don't find anything strange about $12,000 boutique made case work called "shaker" that most amateurs could build).


----------



## Woody2Shoes (31 Jan 2020)

AJB Temple":2ysd7uyl said:


> Well - the old original birdcage tables I have seen in real life have neither rotated nor tilted. That is not to say that they didn't at one time I suppose. They certainly were making rotating candle stands to go up and down on a screw at that time, and also more rudimentary candle and rush taper holders that could be adjusted for height.
> 
> For anyone who has the book, look at Figure 3.184 on page 297. Very high quality birdcage with four turned posts and arches, and an elaborate through centre post. Clearly not designed to tilt in that case.



I wish I had a copy of your book!

The antique ones that have passed through my family have usually rotated and mostly tilted (unless bodged by some repairer). I suspect that there is a difference between US and European designs and between the use envisaged when they were first made (e.g. tea or candles!).

There are a couple of common themes for the antique ones:
- there is very often an iron re-inforcement under the base of the tripod - perhaps sometimes added later;
- there are often repairs near the feet where the short-grain of the curved leg has proved (almost literally) to be an achilles heel.

Cheers, W2S


----------



## Eric The Viking (31 Jan 2020)

AJB Temple":3ubhkuao said:


> My medieval refectory table is getting on for 4 inches thick on the top and the legs and braces are what one might call sturdy.



That's so that when it was turned over in a fight, the arrowheads wouldn't stick out at the back. 

I've got me coat...

E.


----------



## Jacob (31 Jan 2020)

Woody2Shoes":1319x8cy said:


> .......
> Here's a design (a bit chunky but could be refined) for a dining table which is essentially a pair these pedestals supporting one tabletop:
> 
> https://www.barkerandstonehouse.co.uk/d ... 797-91502/
> ...


Exactly! But slender Shaker style.
I still don't like it but its better without the stretcher and stronger with 2 extra legs.


----------



## Jacob (31 Jan 2020)

Woody2Shoes":3ctgvr0t said:


> AJB Temple":3ctgvr0t said:
> 
> 
> > Well - the old original birdcage tables I have seen in real life have neither rotated nor tilted. That is not to say that they didn't at one time I suppose. They certainly were making rotating candle stands to go up and down on a screw at that time, and also more rudimentary candle and rush taper holders that could be adjusted for height.
> ...


 Only £12 and 579 pages!: https://www.abebooks.co.uk/servlet/Book ... 0551618985
A lot of these classics come cheap after a while as interested parties rush out and buy them when first published, in larger quantities than you imagine. 
I've done it myself and very few hold their price. I probably paid a tenner 2nd hand. Most books are first editions which may surprise some, but it's because they never make it to a 2nd edition, so don't get over excited! 
Some do hold price: I bought this new for £30 or so when it first came out https://www.amazon.co.uk/Country-Furnit ... 0300063962 and it's worth every penny, a real gem of a book.
On the other hand I bought this when it was out of print and highly collectable, £100 plus, but now back in print for peanuts! I paid £30 ish I think. https://wordery.com/swedish-carving-tec ... 1627106733
Also a gem!


----------



## Steve Maskery (31 Jan 2020)

Right, where were we before we got side-tracked? Ah yes, improving on nature.

There are a couple of places where the balance of pippiness is not as good as I would like, such as here:






So I rough cut a little patch from some waste and I think it will improve things a bit.






But it's a one-way journey!






Fingers crossed...






And after a couple of more as well, whaddayano?






So then it just biscuiting and gluing and clamping up






I have a nice even line of glue all the way along.






That'll be it for a while. It's clear I have to finalise the design but if I do stick with this, and I do like it, I will need a very particular board for the columns, which I do not yet have. I'm going to leave the top untrimmed until the end. I'm still mulling over whether to have the end square or slightly curved, and the edges square or slightly bevelled under.

Decisions, decisions.

So I'll probably get on with another project for a while. I have far too many doors to make (two pairs for Ray, 6 for myself - glad I bought a Domino) and I need a new bench, preferably before the woodworm season gets underway again.

But feel free to continue discussing the design, I'm genuinely grateful for your very constructive criticisms.


----------



## Fitzroy (31 Jan 2020)

The difference between experience and noob! I would never have though you could cut such a patch to balance up two boards. Looking good so far. 

Fitz.


----------



## Racers (31 Jan 2020)

Steve Maskery":2i4tqj4c said:


> Well, when so many experienced people, whose opinions I (normally!  ) respect tell me I'm wrong, I should listen.
> 
> So I've beefed it up at both ends, The leg is now 25mm taller at the dovetail end and the top rails are now 95mm deep, set as a bridle joint.
> 
> What do you think? Click to enlarge:



That's better but I liked the round tops of the original, it looks a bit top heavy now. 
Round tops with a upright stretcher fixed to the cleats underneath the top would look lighter.
Link the legs together at the top as well. 


Pete


----------



## Steve Maskery (31 Jan 2020)

I've just been down to take the clamps off and scrape the glue. The glue line is perfect, but the top is not flat. It's a bit crowned at one end. Not by much, 1-2mm over its width at the most, but I was hoping for skating rink flat. It is, at the other end. We'll see how it settles. I think that that much will pull down onto those cross-piece thingies. Somebody must know what they are called? Cross rails? Braces? Goingacrossbits?


----------



## ColeyS1 (31 Jan 2020)

Smart job adding the extra pippyness. Adding plastic packers under the clamps are something that catches me out all to often. 

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## Steve Maskery (31 Jan 2020)

Racers":w1vkc5xz said:


> That's better but I liked the round tops of the original, it looks a bit top heavy now.
> Round tops with an upright stretcher fixed to the cleats underneath the top would look lighter.
> Link the legs together at the top as well.
> 
> Pete


I'm afraid I don't understand you, Pete, and I'd like to do so.

Ah yes, the penny has just dropped whilst typing this. I get what you are suggesting, I think, but the more I add at the top, the heavier it is, and, just as importantly, the higher the Centre of Gravity.

I'll have a play in SU.

S


----------



## TheTiddles (31 Jan 2020)

Shaker style always makes me smile, the shakers were a very small community living in a small area in a very frugal and highly regimented way, as such the style is very specific (and heavily orientated around that peg rail you can see in the pictures already posted). So, no there isn't really such a thing as shaker style fitted kitchen, tv unit (more amusingly), or my all time favourite... a drinks cabinet!

As for the legs, a discrete metal plate let in under the joint would stress relieve the joint effectively. Not everything needs to be built like a Russian tank (says the man with the 150kg dining table)

Aidan


----------



## Steve Maskery (31 Jan 2020)

Hey! Aidan! Where have you been?! Nice of you to drop in. Do it more often.
I think that a couple of discrete plates would be a good idea, and I would make sure that they are also discreet.


----------



## TheTiddles (31 Jan 2020)

Fair enough, discrete metal plates may not be useful!

I have a 3-way mitre joint on my coffee table that I was going to put a metal plate under, till I realised that as the legs cantilevered, it would be in compression not tension and therefore useless

Aidan


----------



## Racers (3 Feb 2020)

Steve Maskery":1hmb4i2a said:


> Racers":1hmb4i2a said:
> 
> 
> > That's better but I liked the round tops of the original, it looks a bit top heavy now.
> ...



I knew what I ment, I think!

I like the cylindrical tops of the legs on the orignal design.
I would keep them and add a stretcher half lapped in to the cylinder across the table top, attached to cleats to hold the top flat.

I have some nice brass staidum washers with elongated holes for attaching tops and brass rounded headed screws, if you want some.

Pete


----------



## Steve Maskery (3 Feb 2020)

I know you know what you meant 

I've just spent a couple of very productive hours with my mate Dave who Knows All Things SketchUp.

This is where I am at the moment. I know Jacob wants me to get rid of the rail, but I don't want two tripods.














I haven't drawn it in, but I think a stainless steel disc under the column, screwed into the three dovetails would seal the deal for me. At just 1.4m (55") it is not a large table.


----------



## MikeG. (3 Feb 2020)

Did you have a think about my suggestion of extending the central column/ pillar/ leg downwards below the joints?


----------



## AndyT (3 Feb 2020)

I like that design. And I look forward to watching how you approach it. My experience of this sort of thing is pretty much limited to watching Roy Underhill in the video Woody2Shoes linked to earlier. If you've not done so yet, do watch it, if only to see how difficult it is. He shows how to mark it out and cut the joints using hand tools. If you wanted to use a powered router I guess you'd need to build some sort of trough to hold the leg, with provision for rotating it by 120 degrees. But I expect you've worked all this out already!


----------



## Steve Maskery (3 Feb 2020)

Yes I did, Mike 
The problem with that is that I would have three open dovetails slots on view, which I don't want.
S


----------



## Steve Maskery (3 Feb 2020)

AndyT":3q8rglh5 said:


> My experience of this sort of thing is pretty much limited to watching Roy Underhill in the video Woody2Shoes linked to earlier.



Andy, I can't find what you are referring to. Can you give me a link please? Ta.

S


----------



## AndyT (3 Feb 2020)

Steve Maskery":3s9pvwny said:


> AndyT":3s9pvwny said:
> 
> 
> > My experience of this sort of thing is pretty much limited to watching Roy Underhill in the video Woody2Shoes linked to earlier.
> ...



Back on page 2:


Woody2Shoes":3s9pvwny said:


> There's a good video of Roy Underhill making the sliding dovetails for a "Hancock Pedestal Table" which I think is the sort of design that might have influenced the designer of what influenced Steve (!)https://www.pbs.org/video/the-woodwrights-shop-hancock-pedestal-table/



(Edited to fix link)


----------



## MikeG. (3 Feb 2020)

Steve Maskery":20tn4rov said:


> Yes I did, Mike
> The problem with that is that I would have three open dovetails slots on view, which I don't want.
> S



You could just tenon them in.


----------



## Steve Maskery (3 Feb 2020)

Thanks Andy (and W2S), I'd missed that.

He is amazing, really, it's just one long take, very few cuts, no umming and ahhing, very well prepared with the Blue Peter* bits. He always seems to have bloodied fingers though! 

You won't be surprised to know that I am considering a more mechanical, jiggy sort of approach 

I've also found a supplier of suitable stainless steel on eBay.
S
* Here's one I did earlier...


----------



## Jacob (3 Feb 2020)

Steve Maskery":14g4f18k said:


> I know you know what you meant
> 
> I've just spent a couple of very productive hours with my mate Dave who Knows All Things SketchUp.
> 
> This is where I am at the moment. I know Jacob wants me to get rid of the rail, but I don't want two tripods........


Looks better with the curve in the rail.
Re steel - your disc doesn't sound big enough - the screws would be into the DTs and too close to the end. I think you need more of a strap, set-in, out of sight, If the legs were at 90º an angle iron might do it, bent a bit to match the legs.


Steve Maskery":14g4f18k said:


> Yes I did, Mike
> The problem with that is that I would have three open dovetails slots on view, which I don't want.
> S


You'd only see them if you were lying drunkenly on the floor face up with your head between the table legs?


----------



## gasman (4 Feb 2020)

Hi Steve
I just reread this whole thread.... seems like a lot of people think these joints are under too much pressure. I am imagining that top must weigh a bit - 20kg?? the other bits will be weighty too. Then you only have to have someone leaning on one side and there is a whole lot of torque on one of those 4 leg 'joints'. I still think you are asking for trouble making it like that. Still loving the hippiness 'tho. BW Mark


----------



## Steve Maskery (4 Feb 2020)

I've not weighed it, but if you assume a density of 500kg/m3, then the whole thing without the feet comes in at about 26kg. That is less than 7kg per foot. Does that seem excessive to you? It doesn't to me, but I am no structural engineer.


----------



## MikeG. (4 Feb 2020)

That's "dead weight", Steve, and is pretty meaningless. "Live weight", which are the forces that anything needs to sustain due to loadings on it because of human activity, are an altogether different thing. Like I said before, someone doing as people always do, leaning on the edge of the table for support either standing up or sitting down, will, in my view, break the wood around the joints eventually. It may not happen immediately, but I have no doubt it will happen.


----------



## Hornbeam (4 Feb 2020)

If you look at the base of many old tripod leg tables, you will see that the joint has failed at some time. These have often been repaired and then been reinforced with a circular plate sometimes with an extended strap down the underside of the leg. The problem is that the metal can actually cause further failure as it results in different movement with the wood and pulls the joint apart.
I agree with Mike that good mortice and tenons and an extended finial below the leg joint will strengthen it up.
Not sure of teh change in design from having the legs opposite each other to having them angled. This means that to get the same stability the legs will have to be longer creating more leverage on the joint.
Nice top and burr modification
Ian


----------



## Steve Maskery (4 Sep 2020)

Blow the cobwebs off this...
The top has been leaning up in my dining room ever since this started. I didn't realise it has been so long!

I'm still keen to attempt my original design idea, and I've worked out how I can do it. But it requires a VERY particular board for the pillars and as yet I've not found it.

So I have decided, as an interim measure, to make a bog standard four-legs-and-aprons understructure, pine, painted something like National Trust green. Nothing fancy, just slightly tapered legs, that's it. The tapers are on the inside faces only. Tapering the outside can make the table look somewhat pigeon-toed.

So this week I bought some 3" unsorted redwood and prepped it up. The mortices are best cut while the legs are still in the square:





I might cut in a shallow bit for the haunch, but the tenon itself is quite wide, so I don't think it will be necessary, I think I'd rather maintain the integrity of the endgrain, TBH.

The taper starts 110mm below the top and goes from 60mm down to 42mm at the toe:










I'm cutting the tapers on the bandsaw, and as you might expect, I'm making a little jig. OK, for a one-off, I could easily just cut them freehand, but I have a reputation to uphold... 

I stole the L-shaped extension piece I sometimes use on my SCMS when I run out of fence length andscrewed that down to piece of scrap OSB:






So now I simply put my workpiece against the L and saw away. The first cut is always wth one inside face down on the bed of the jig and the other inside face outwards. That way the workpiece is always properly seated.

So I run the whole lot through the bandsaw:






Then rotate it for the other inside face. The result is this:




And after a swift pass on the planer:




So simple it's hardly worth writing up, really. But it needs recording, as one never knows when one's clogs are going to get popped.


----------



## custard (5 Sep 2020)

Hello Steve, going back to the point about furniture strength, I'm frequently surprised at just how strong even quite spindly looking pieces can be, just think about chairs carrying hefty blokes for year after year.

This is a Shaker piece that I make fairly regularly,







When I first made it I joked to prospective clients that it was not suitable for households "with small boys or big dogs". To be honest I was sceptical the legs would survive first contact with a vacuum cleaner. But I must have sold fifteen or twenty of them by now, and this first mock up has been in my house for about five years. Touch wood I haven't had any breakages so far!


----------



## Steve Maskery (5 Sep 2020)

That is very elegant, custard, very nice indeed. 
What I'm doing now is just to tide me over. I've been without a proper dining table for 9 years and am fed up of my dining room looking like a timber yard. So having got the top sorted, I just want a quick and dirty undercarriage until I can get just the right board for the columns.


----------



## Setch (5 Sep 2020)

I implore you Steve, never use the phrase "quick and dirty uncarriage" again.


----------



## Doug B (5 Sep 2020)

Setch said:


> I implore you Steve, never use the phrase "quick and dirty uncarriage" again.


What’s wrong with a quick & dirty undercarriage? Some of us are grateful for what ever we can get


----------



## Farm Labourer (6 Sep 2020)

custard said:


> Hello Steve, going back to the point about furniture strength, I'm frequently surprised at just how strong even quite spindly looking pieces can be, just think about chairs carrying hefty blokes for year after year.
> 
> This is a Shaker piece that I make fairly regularly,
> 
> View attachment 91618


Custard, I'd love to see a photo taken from beneath. It looks uber-elegant.


----------



## custard (8 Sep 2020)

Farm Labourer said:


> Custard, I'd love to see a photo taken from beneath. It looks uber-elegant.



Rather than create a digression on Steve's post, I'll start a new thread!


----------



## Farm Labourer (8 Sep 2020)

Thank you, that's very helpful! I certainly wasn't trying to hijack Steve's thread


----------



## Steve Maskery (11 Sep 2020)

This how I made the tapered legs:


----------



## Steve Maskery (21 Sep 2020)

I cut the tenon cheeks a few weeks ago and appear to have forgotten to take any photos. I might be able to fake one tomorrow. But here is a pic of the Ultimate Tablesaw Tenon Jig (TM) from an earlier project






It's quick to set up, fast to operate and gives results that are Right First Time Every Time.

I've been spending more time than I should making a Poor Man's Sliding Table. Well the fence isn't Finished finished (I'm waiting for a flip-stop to arrive before I cut the vertical part of the fence), but it is Useable finished, so I cut the tenon shoulders today.






Then over to the bandsaw to trim the width






Back on the TS fitted with the PMST and the blade tilted to 45deg, I mitred the ends of the tenons so that they will not foul each other inside the mortice cavity.






Then it was cleaning up the arrises and some sanding











These are the two components






So the burning question is, "Do they fit?"






Course they do! I can push them together (just) by hand, but they need a light tap with a mallet to get apart. Just what I want. And I promise you that that is straight off the saw. No, I mean ZERO, fettling.

So it was time to glue up the two end pairs and check for square and wind.






Tomorrow I'll do the same with the long rails.


----------



## Steve Maskery (26 Sep 2020)

It's rarely a good idea to change the design mid-build, but that's exactly what I have done here...

I had a bit of a tidy-up in the workshop and found the offcuts from the original pippy-oak table. There was enough to make two 250mm extension leaves, which would enable me to have the table at 2m long if I had to. Now I don't anticipate that will be necessary very often, the days of dinner parties for 8 or 10 (12 once) are long gone and are not coming back, but a 5ft table is quite modest. Perfect for my every-day needs, but, who knows, eh?

I have made dining tables in the past with fancy folding leaf mechanisms; drop-leaf, butterfly and swivel-fold, but they are all rather complex, and, for this at least, unnecessary. I'm going to have two plain leaves on forks that slot into the ends of the table. They will be stored underneath when not needed.

So I made two pairs of forks that will fold together nicely:






and cut notches in my end aprons, which would have been so much easier if I had thought of this before I glued up the end assemblies:





until the forks fitted nicely






Then I made a pair of bearers on which the leaves will sit, underneath the table, but I seem to be having some camera trouble, a whole series of pictures have come out blurred. It's either senility creeping in, or it means my camera is on the blink. Either way 

So the first stage of the glue-up is done, the bearers just biscuited into the long rails, and my Square of Thales tells me that everything is spot-on square (although I did need a bit of diagonal bracing to ensure it was right).






Tomorrow I shall attach the end frames and make some buttons.


----------



## Max Power (26 Sep 2020)

Coming along nicely Steve and very entertaining reading


----------



## Steve Maskery (27 Sep 2020)

I actually went back into the workshop last night and attached the ends, so this morning I took the clamps off and it looked like this:






You can see how the leaves are going to sit underneath.

Today's main task was to make the buttons. There are two approaches to this: starting with a short wide board or starting with long off-rips.

If you have a short board end, this is a good use for it. Just rout a rebate along the end-grain edge to create a tongue, then chop it up into individual buttons.

But in my workshop, I'm much more likely to have long narrow off-rips, so I'm adopting a different approach. Tou won't be the slightest bit surprised to learn that I have a jig for this job...

I first published this many years ago when I was filming my first Workshop Essentials series. It's on Volume 5 if you are interested. This is still the very same jig from that time, although it is getting a bit tatty now.

It consists of a baseboard with a slightly shorter sub-base on it, and a fence-cum-handle with a slightly shorter and quite thin (5mm or so) sub-fence on that. 






There is only one set-up, and that is the distance of the bandsaw fence from the blade. Get that right and all the other dimensions drop into place.

The stock needs to be the right thicknes - a tad less than the distance from the bottom of the apron groove to the top of the apron. I removed all the long-grain arrises before I started, as it is easier than doing each one separately afterwards.

So the first cut is a rip cut to create the length of the tongue.






Then the workpiece is held aginst the sub-base to cut off the waste leaving me with a tongue.









Then the workpiece is held down on the table and the jig pushes it worwards and clear of the blade






Normally I wouldn't dream of using the rip fence as a cross-cut length gauge, but here the lettle bit is properly supported all through the cut and ends up well clear of the blade.






Which produces this:




A bit of a clean up on the disk sander





And like Cinderella's slipper it fits






They just need a countersunk hole how and they are finished.

But time was marching on and I wanted to get a coat of primer on the base before I left. It was only when I was uploading this photo that I realised I'd missed a bit.






Ho hum.


----------



## TheTiddles (27 Sep 2020)

How are you going to stop the stored leaves from fading less than the rest of the top? Seems to be a common problem on tables of this type (unless you cover the top which removes the point of having a nice top in my opinion )

Aidan


----------



## Steve Maskery (27 Sep 2020)

Hi Aidan. I can't say that I've given that any thought. Perhaps I'll just never open the curtains and live in the dark.

S


----------



## Steve Maskery (29 Sep 2020)

You can see the Button Jig in action here:


----------



## Steve Maskery (25 Oct 2020)

I gave the base a coat of primer






and then several coats of eggshell. It's not easy getting a flawless finish and mine most certainly isn't. but the bits that are seen are OK. Not great, but OK. I'd need to hire Doctor Bob's painters to get what I'd actually like.

There was enough wood left over to make a couple of leaves. They just plug into the ends. When not in use they arms fold away and they will store underneath. (Allegedly, as you'll see in a moment...)






Those supporting rails have been lined with baize to stop the leaves from getting scratched. I used spray adhesive and trimmed the baize after application






There are ten buttons holding down the top






With the leaves installed, I added couple of nice brass table forks






And that's when I hit a snag. The arms of the leaves fold away, but they are longer than the distance between them. So one can turn 90 degrees, but the other has to turn 270. But with the brass fork socket in the way... Oops.






It's easy enough to fix, I just need to shorten on of the arms by a couple of inches, so it can fold inwards rather than outwards. Embarrassing, though.

The top is finished with a coat of Boiled Linseed Oil (BLO) and then Osmo. I wish my finishing was as good as my joinery. The finish is OK, but, TBH, it's a bit patchy in places. I think I'll just have to keep waxing it, hoping it will even out.

So this is what it looks like now.






It's bigger in the room than it looked in the workshop! And with the leaves attached it is too big.






TBH, I can't ever see me using it like that. It would seat 6 very comfortably and I could probably squeeze 8 round it. I don't have that many friends any more. I have two friends who come over, Sheila, who doesn't eat meat, and Charlie, who doesn't eat anything he hasn't cooked himself. The days of big dinner parties are over.

So. I've not given up on the orginal Shaker-double-tripod variation entirely, despite Mike's protestations, but this is growing on me, so it may just be temporary until I die.


----------



## custard (25 Oct 2020)

Very tidy job.

All furniture that you've made yourself is special, but a dining table is that little bit _extra_ special. To break bread with friends or family at a table that you've crafted yourself, well it brings an extra dimension to any meal.


----------



## Steliz (25 Oct 2020)

The top looks lovely but I'm not keen on the green paint.


----------



## Felix (25 Oct 2020)

Proper job.....nice


----------



## Steve Maskery (25 Oct 2020)

Steliz said:


> The top looks lovely but I'm not keen on the green paint.


I was inspired by Doctor Bob:





When I put the first coat on, I thought to myself, "Steve, what on earth have you done?" But now, 6 or 8 coats later, I've lost count, it's beginning to grow on me. And in the dining room, in the shade of the top, it looks darker and much less green anyway. I really rather like it.


----------



## lurker (25 Oct 2020)

Gentleman's residence green, that shade ought to be called.


----------



## NickM (25 Oct 2020)

Looks brill!


----------



## Racers (26 Oct 2020)

I like that Steve, the colour is nice imho.

Pete


----------



## Steve Maskery (29 Oct 2020)

I lost some footage when I laid my garden path , but here is a mish-mash of what I've been able to salvage. I hope it shows the thought processes and challenges I overcame.
Enjoy!


----------

