Another Trestle Table Design

[Keith Starosta]

Recently, my wife and I were browsing through Fine Woodworking's "102 Contemporary Designs". She was marveling at most of the craftsmanship, and then she got to page 54, where Tyler Chartier's trestle table was displayed. "That's it....that's what we need!!" We've been trying to come up with an idea for replacing our current round 4-person table (currently seating 6 people ). So, I began studying the design, and then went to Tyler's website. After spending a while going through his photo gallery, I sent him an e-mail asking if it would be possible to get some specific measurements. Much to my surprise, he wrote back, giving me his home number, and said that I should give him a call! Very cool.

Anyway...after spending some time in SketchUp, I came up with this drawing. Because I like his table so much, I'm sticking very close to his design, but I'll have to bring the dimensions down a bit. The space our version will go in will not support a 69" long table. Please take a look at these drawings, and let me know what you think of the scaling.

Thanks very much!!

- Keith

[Chris Friesen]

Generally I like the design. If it were me, I'd be tempted to move the stretchers up higher so that they don't get bumped by knees.

Personally, I'm in love with the trestle table from the Autumn 2006 issue of Woodworking Magazine. It's 8 feet long though...

http://www.popularwoodworkingshop.co...1628_popup.jpg

[John Schreiber]

That's a very pretty trestle table. I found some more pictures of it on-line and I think it has more curves than your model. The problem I've found with any organic shapes is that they have to be just right, or they can look wrong. I'd look at the pictures below and anything else you can find to try and get those as close as possible to the original. You also might try doing some parts with cardboard or scrap before making them from expensive wood.

http://www.chartiercustomfurniture.c...stletable.html

http://www.chartiercustomfurniture.c...lery/index.php

[Danny Thompson]

Looks great!

One question. Will you put chairs at the ends? If so, you have left only 8.5 " of kneespace at the head of the table. I would increase that to at least 12".

In preparation for my recent table project (36" x 84"), I had several friends sit at the end of a table and measured how much clearance they needed when sitting comfortably. The max was about 11". Since none of my test subjects were over 6', I bumped the clearance up a bit and set the legs 14" in from the ends. Final clearance was 13" due to a through tenon. Later, during the dry fit I had some taller friends sit at the table. The 14"/13" was good.

[Jim Becker]

I like the proportions of that table. Very nice. You've gotten some good suggestions for minor and practical adjustments, too.

[Keith Starosta]

Thanks very much for all the suggestions, guys! I appreciate it.

I modified my SketchUp drawing a little. I took Danny's suggestion, and moved the legs in about 4" on each side. This will give me 12" of leg room underneath each end of the table. I think it still looks pretty good like this, but would like some opinions on stability. Based on the new spacing of the legs, combined with the size of the top, do you think I will be OK with little kids putting a bit of downward elbow pressure on all points of the top? I'd hate to see this thing go over!

Thanks again for the advice!

- Keith

[Jamie Buxton]

This table is made of hardwood, right? If so, it is fairly heavy. Kids' elbows are not going to make it tip. Perhaps it will tip if you sit on the end, but it'd take something like that.

[Doug Shepard]

I like the look but is 36" between the legs enough? I really dont know. It just sounds snug to me at 18" per person. will 2 chairs fit between?

[Keith Starosta]

I like the look but is 36" between the legs enough? I really dont know. It just sounds snug to me at 18" per person. will 2 chairs fit between?

I see what you mean, Doug. After I posted last night, I popped the table into an older model I did of our entire first floor, just to see how it would look. It looked....small....ish. After showing the LOML, she agreed. We both decided that a 72" table will fit fine in that space, so I'll be doing another version. Also....and this made me laugh....she said she'd like it to be "chunkier". Basically, she'd like the individual components to be thicker, with more dimension.

This should be fun...

- Keith

[Keith Starosta]

OK...after listening to some of the exact details my wife wanted to see in this table, I sat down and completely re-drew it in SketchUp. She wants it to have a "beefier" look than the original drawing, while still being functional for the family. Like I said in an earlier post, we opted to go longer, but not wider. Here is what I came up with...



I moved the legs in a few inches, and now have a full 13 1/2" of leg room on both ends. The 38" between the legs should be just fine for our kids. Even if we have other folks over for dinner, each inside seat would have 18+" of space. Based on what some have said, 18" is a standard.



I'm pretty sure I accomplished what the LOML was hoping for, as far as "beefiness". No doubt about it...it's gonna be a heavy table! But, it passed her, "So what do you think of this?" test. The leg itself will be 27" long. I wasn't sure if there was a rule of thumb, as far as placement of the trestle support, so I just placed it where I thought it looked good. Turns out it's about 1/3 the way up the leg.



After staring at it for a while this afternoon, I'm still not sure if I've done the right thing with the top. She wanted a "thick-looking" table top...at least 2" thick. Also, she decided that breadboard ends are definitely the way to go. In an attempt to save on weight and money, I designed the top with an underside lip, as it were. The underside end pieces are the same dimension as the top... 1"x6"x32". The two long underside pieces, however, are merely there to create the illusion of thickness, measuring 1"x1.75"x60". Does anybody see this as being the wrong solution to the design requirement? Should I just suck it up, buy 10/4 material, and move on?

Thanks for any thoughts or ideas you can offer!

Regards,

Keith

[Jim Becker]

I'm kinda partial to full thickness material, so that's what I'd use for the breadboard ends for sure. For the field, you could do a mitered edge and give the appearance of thick boards without a visible lamination.

I like this generation of the base much better...proportionally it feels nicer to me.

[Doug Shepard]

... Should I just suck it up, buy 10/4 material, and move on?
...

I think i would just because of the visible lamination joint line. But maybe you could cheat a bit and use 10/4 for the breadboard ends, and outer 2 long pieces and use thinner stock on the middle two? Then add a spacer on top of the legs in the middle to meet the thinner boards?

[Danny Thompson]

Elegant design, Keith.

Stability will not be a problem.

[Keith Starosta]

I'm having some trouble determining which way the edge grain should face for the legs on my table. I've attached a picture that shows two options, and would appreciate some opinions. Is there a structural reason why one option would be better over another, or is this purely an ascethetic choice?

I haven't fully made up my mind about what species of wood will be used in construction, but do know that it will be a tight-grained, open-pour wood...possibly mahogany, or maybe sapele.

Thanks for your help!!

- Keith

[Danny Thompson]

Keith,

I am confused. Shouldn't you have edge grain on all four vertical sides and end grain at the very top and bottom, only? Please explain?