Needs Pictures: 0
Picture(s) thanks: 0
Results 16 to 24 of 24
-
23rd March 2020, 10:57 PM #16
Keep in mind that you're not going to see the bit that is inside the table because they're stopped sliding dovetails on both ends. I don't think anyone would notice them at all to be honest. It's different in the pic of that other table because the stretchers go all the way to the edges of the table and that design is able to get away with shallower top stretchers by having more of them and his "trestles" have legs that are wider apart. Your stretcher is more cantilevered from the middle and has less support towards the edge of the table. In your case, I'd err on the side of function over form, especially as I don't think anyone would notice the. I'd go with a 90mm or higher stretcher with a rectangular cross section with normal dovetail. If you're concerned about it being too high, you can put a slight taper from the middle. This would give you a standard bridle joint at the legs which IMO would be a lot stronger. I think Ishitani has done something similar. Also, have you considered adding a bottom stretcher to help counter racking or the legs from splaying out?
-
23rd March 2020 10:57 PM # ADSGoogle Adsense Advertisement
- Join Date
- Always
- Location
- Advertising world
- Posts
- Many
-
23rd March 2020, 11:05 PM #17
Check out the 11:20 min mark of Ishitani's trestle video. His table is much smaller than yours but his top stretchers look quite substantial in comparison. They're definitely more than 90mm high at the middle at the leg joint. I'd be going higher if I were you. He's also "housed" (I'm not sure if that's the correct term) the bridle joint which I think makes it even stronger.
-
23rd March 2020, 11:10 PM #18
Adding a bottom stretcher would maker it less prone to racking. However in all the antiques I have seen the bottom stretcher always gets the kicked out of it. Because people rest their feet on it.
I have opted instead opted to have the two top stretcher each being 125mm high. This will give big shoulders to counter racking forces.
I would be happy to add more dovetails and to spread my legs further apart to reduce the cantilevered affect.
Function should not usurp Form their must be a balance between the two.
Give me time to redo the CAD to look at options.
-
23rd March 2020, 11:28 PM #19
Adding more top stretchers dovetailed to the top won't help help with the cantilever unless they're directly attached to legs (i.e. adding a 3rd middle leg, which isn't what I'm advocating because it'd ruin the aesthetics). Take your middle stretcher, it will help stop your top from cupping but it won't help at all when a couple of fat blokes sit on the edge of your table. The things that will help with the cantilever are the height of the top stretchers (particularly at the leg connection), the width of the leg at the bridle joint, and to a lesser degree the thickness of the top stretchers. Basically, the cross-section of your table is a big I-beam. I think the bottom of the I is fine but the top needs strengthening.
-
23rd March 2020, 11:39 PM #20
Fine woodworking published an article on this sliding dovetail and tabletops I will dig it up tomorrow to get it from the horses mouth.
-
23rd March 2020, 11:45 PM #21
Yeah I was seeing it as 2 legs and 4 pegs . 4 and 8 is better . It'll be good !
The picture of the other table looks good to, with the smaller dovetail rails like yours .
Bottom stretchers are a comfy thing for feet to rest on . I sit at one and love it . They have to be real low for that to work . Yeah over time and with shoes on they get marked . Looked after they get buffed up and dusted off all the time .
Trestles are a great table to sit at and use . One thing I like is the possibility of a lower top than other tables allow. How high is yours ? I couldn't see a height.
Rob
-
23rd March 2020, 11:54 PM #22
Looking at this image and gauging size by his finger nails - it looks like the stretcher ends are max 50 x 50 its only in the middle were it has the bridal joint that it expands to 90 high so to accommodate the connection with the leg.
Screen Shot 2020-03-23 at 11.46.34 pm.jpg
Rob the table height is set at 765 mm on the tall side because I am.
-
24th March 2020, 10:16 AM #23
You're probably right.
-
24th March 2020, 10:45 AM #24
I awoke this morning with an idea that may reconcile the varied concerns while further increasing the tables rigidity.
By turning the single sided V dovetails into double side sliding butterflies ><.
Since the sliding butterflies would be housed/embedded in all of the table members.
This would lock the lattice structure (red) to the tabletop (blue) to the legs (black) & the two major horizontal stretchers (green) in two directions not only one.
I have also rendered the major horizontal stretchers in an faint green to illustrate their size and capacity to resist racking.
Screen Shot 2020-03-24 at 10.55.26 am.pngScreen Shot 2020-03-24 at 10.56.18 am.pngScreen Shot 2020-03-24 at 10.55.51 am.png
Similar Threads
-
Some feedback on a bunk design
By izzy_a in forum FURNITURE, JOINERY, CABINETMAKING - formerly BIG STUFFReplies: 15Last Post: 28th March 2017, 02:01 AM -
Trestle table legs
By Big Shed in forum WOODWORK - GENERALReplies: 7Last Post: 20th April 2012, 08:52 AM -
Feedback sought on NEW JET 18 inch bandsaw
By warmtone in forum BANDSAWSReplies: 11Last Post: 4th March 2007, 11:22 AM