Thread: Another coffee table

Originally Posted by derekcohen

Just looking at this design gives me a headache. What appears so simple for a non-woodworker is a bloody nightmare when aware of the level of difficulty in the construction.

C'mon Derek, the design is really only difficult if you insist in building it with solid wood.
Like much mid-century modern furniture, that piece is designed to be constructed from veneered board -- most probably particle board -- and mass (or batch) production.


Reading Rob's description, I believe he has nailed the construction.
Curving the outside of each corner is straight forward. for the internal corners I suggest you make a false base for a router and use a core box bit to waste the majority of the material that needs to be removed to create the shape. Pick a diameter for the inside curve that corresponds to a standard hollow plane -- at the scale at which you are working hollows are sized in 1/8" steps, rather than the 1/16" used for smaller sizes. Try and go for a even rather than odd size number.
(Even numbers correspond to part of a standard set, odd numbers being added to make a full "set".)

The internal hollow could possibly be done traversing the table saw blade like in this video. Its a bit small for this sort of thing but if you didn't have a close router bit it would save buying one.

https://www.finewoodworking.com/2013...n-the-tablesaw


Rob

hi Rob
Given that Derek wants to build this mid-century Danish modern table from solid wood rather than veneered board, do you think it would be worthwhile if he ripped and re-glued his plank to produce a 550 mm wide quarter sawn board? A wide quarter sawn board should be a lot less prone to warping obviating the need to consider bread board ends.

Originally Posted by ian

A wide quarter sawn board should be a lot less prone to warping obviating the need to consider bread board ends.

Hi Ian. I haven't understood the use of the term breadboard ends in this thread . The original smart looking coffee table doesn't have any . It has corners that curve around and join the sides. I suppose if the grain ran across at the end and wasn't joined to the side, it could be seen as a drooped breadboard end.
What I have been saying is, to do the grain in the corners in the same direction as top bottom and sides. Its stronger , moves in the same direction and looks a lot better .

Originally Posted by ian

Given that Derek wants to build this mid-century Danish modern table from solid wood rather than veneered board, do you think it would be worthwhile if he ripped and re-glued his plank to produce a 550 mm wide quarter sawn board?

As long as the same was done to the corner arcs . If they match, then movement across the width should match. It the whole lot was properly done from 1/4 sawn then movement across the width would be reduced a lot.
There is plenty of bracing from the ends and the dividers to stop lifting or warping though . And I think Jarrah is very stable stuff when its dry.

Rob

Hi Rob
I THINK that Derek was concerned that a top 19 mm thick and around 600 wide would be so prone to warping that he would need to use breadboard ends to keep it "flat".

Here's a cross post from SMC, where these photos were posted ...





This offers two other options: dovetails (with mitred ends) followed by rounding, and a rounded mitred end. In each, the inside receives a filler, which is hollowed.

It's a toss up between the dovetailing, or simply mitering the ends and rounding them. The latter allows the grain to flow around the sides and top, while the former is interesting in a different way (perhaps too busy?).

Irony is, the nephew has acknowledged that they like a square end as well, and would enjoy either. Decisions.

Regards from Perth

Derek

When you originally said you were considering breadboard ends I assumed you meant that the “corner” pieces would be made from separate pieces of timber with the grain running at 90 degrees

Originally Posted by Chief Tiff

When you originally said you were considering breadboard ends I assumed you meant that the “corner” pieces would be made from separate pieces of timber with the grain running at 90 degrees

Ditto!

Originally Posted by Chief Tiff

When you originally said you were considering breadboard ends I assumed you meant that the “corner” pieces would be made from separate pieces of timber with the grain running at 90 degrees

I would prefer a breadboard if joining two solid wood boards where the grain that runs 90 degrees to each other. Their movement would otherwise pull the joint apart. The orientation does not matter if the material is manmade, such as veneered ply.

So the original design, with a corner section running at 90 degrees to the top, requires a different approach to the last selection, where the boards are dovetailed or mitred and then rounded, which has grain running in the same direction.

Using a corner section is a poorer design feature: it not only introduces issues with weak grain, and it requires more joinery, but it looks "bitty" to my eye.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Hi Derek
here is another way to approach your proposed build.

connect your 19mm boards using a miter joint reinforced with biscuits (or in your case dominos).
reinforce the joint with an appropriately sized and shaped glue block.
shape the inside and outside of the joint to the curved shape as on the model table.
glue a 5mm thick edge strip onto the top and sides, which you join and shape at the corners to whatever profile you require.

this will give you clean corners that are as sharp or as blunt as you desire, where the "messiness" of the join is hidden by the edge strip.

I would make fine cuts across the grain with the table saw leaving about 2 to 3 mm thickness. Jarrah will bend very easily and only needs a veneer along the edge. I've done this many times and looks very good when finished.

Terry, a bit late to the party, Mate

Someone did suggesting kerfing early on. It is a reasonable technique, but I did not want to veneer. Thanks for the idea.

Regards from Perth

Derek