a client wants a mission style table with a 5 foot diameter 2 inch thick solid white oak top
whats the best way to make this up, hes determined to have solid lumber, preferably 1/4 sawn, but thats one big glue up, not to mention cupping and or warpping
any suggestions would be welcome
Replies
Except for the thickness (about double normal) it's not really unusual, right? Why do you think that the extra thickness will present problems? I mean it will be heavy as all get out, but warping and cupping, etc., should be no different than normal, nor should the glue up process.
heavy is right, i figure about 80 pounds, im concerned about cupping and warping and how to prevent it on such a large piece
I've never had thick pieces cup or warp more than thinner ones. The steps to prepare the boards (4 square) and join the boards and flatten the glue-up are really the same. You're gonna need some long clamps (at least for the final glue up if the table is not going to have a leaf).
i really didnt think so, just flat and square like any other slab glue up, cut the final circle shape after final planing etc etc
guess i'll have to really hone my hand planes nicely!!
Steve--I made one similar to this a few years ago. I glued up 12" wide sections that would go through my planer, glued those up and then sanded the top with a belt sander. I cut the circle on the table saw using a pivot point. Finishing both sides the same will help it stay flat. Bill
thx bill, my biggest concern is grain orientation when glueing up the sections, ther seems to be a fair amount of conflicting advice on this
the whole top out of 1/4 sawn is out of the question due to cost, flat sawn seems to be the way to go cost wise
other suggestions?, this would be the largest and thickest slab in my experience
I know there is a lot of discussion about grain orientation, alternating the growth rings, etc. I really don't think it makes much difference. I select for appearance and don't worry about orientation. Bill
Hi steve ,
I would try and glue up sections , then halfs , say 30" +
I would take them in and have them wide belt sanded then make sure the seam is good to go , you may want to rout a few draw bolts under the top .As another said you have only one seam to belt sand .
Consider using Rift Sawn Oak it has much of the same characteristics as QS , but costs less , not much difference from flat sawn .
My guess a 2" White Oak top that size will weigh about ,,,, 150 lbs top only .
Put the boards together the way they look the best ,make them look like they grew that way , they are going to be that way a long long time .
regards dusty
Trying to figure weight -- true white oak weighs 45 to 46 pounds/ cu ft when dry, if memory serves (it could be looked up, but I didn't). A 5" diameter table = 19.62 square feet. At 2" thick that is roughly 3 1/4 cu ft., or about 147 lbs.That is also about 39 bd ft,after planing and sawing, so 70 or so bt ft of rough q-sawn oak, so depending on your wood supplier and the quality, you could be paying between $280 and $350 for the top alone. Then you have the rest of the table. Big project.Hadn't thought of it until I saw the numbers, but that top will cost somewhere around $2 per pound in Oak alone.Joe
See also Tage Frid's "Textbook Mistakes" in FWW # 2. Not only should boards not alternate, but the centre wood should face upwards, showing less sapwood and giving better colour.
Jim
my calculations give about 180 pds, a significant weight to be sure
afterall is done, he wants me to transport it about 300 km to his place
and then there is the pedestal it sits on, another topic im sure
Steve,
I built a pedestal table and the table top is a 4 foot octagon, From what others are saying about the weight of the top, the table might be a bit shaky, kind of of top heavy. I don't know what the cure for this is but you might want to try a double pedestal.
Greg
Joe,
You say the top will cost about $2.00 per pound in Oak heck , hamburger meat is more then that .
d
That's true, but hamburger meat doesn't do as good a job of holding a tablecloth and dishes off the floor.J
yeah , but it would be edible furniture .
would we have to merge with the fine cooking forum ?
Really 2" thick, or nominal?
One thing I have noticed, and that has been confirmed by my lumber guru, is that 8/4 stock is rarely very flat after it dries. It takes significantly more planing to get it from rough to ready than, say 4/4. Also, you'll find that the wood has more chance of running wild when you saw it. So you end up with more waste than with thinner stock. That said, once you get there, it's pretty much just as stable as 4/4. Also, since you're going with QS lumber, you'll be ahead of the game.
So, if you need a full 2", you're going to have to start with 12/4 rough and make a LOT of sawdust. If you need only 1-1/2", you can start with rough 8/4 (or S2S), and once you have straight, true wood, just work it like you ordinarily do with hardwood. (Don't forget to allow for expansion/contraction when you fasten the top to the frame.)
And don't freak out on the size -- a 5' circle ain't all that big of a glue-up. It may be a beach to get up the stairs tho' -- make sure you plan ahead for getting it out of your shop and into the customer's home without having to saw it in half. ;-)
Mike Hennessy
Pittsburgh, PA
thx guys for the info, the top is actually 2 inches thick, finished
i wil probably go with 4 inch boards, planed and jointed 4s, glued up to 12 inch slabs, plane and joint, then glue up the main pieces, posibly with steel rods and nuts dadoed into the bottom as a draw bolt, where they will be hidden, client suggests biscuits, but i know that wont work to draw the pieces together, more of a hinderence than anything else Comments?
With a 2" glue edge, there's really no need for biscuits, steel, or anything but glue.
Mike HennessyPittsburgh, PA
I agree with Mike Hennessy, don't bother with any connectors on the edge joints. It's a waste of time at best and a source of problems at worst. This sounds like a straight forward project to me.
BTW, the top should weigh somewhere in the neighborhood of 145-155 lbs.
http://www.ithacawoodworker.com
I use a glue joint set up , one board up and the other down . This little t&g type of joint is typical of what was used long ago . Rarely (not never) did they just butt the boards there was most often some form of glue joint . I have several size sets of knives.
dusty
Chris Schwartz says flat out that alternating growth rings as defense against cupping is an old wives' tale. I agree. If it is going to cup across the width on one, what possible help could it be for the next one to cup the other way? Besides, having been the victim of cupping in floors, I can tell you for sure that if unevenly finished, they ALL cup the same way -- that is -- the side that lets in the most moisture grows more than the other, regardless of inside the tree or outside the tree, and that if evenly finished on both sides and all edges, they don't cup very much.
Joe
I'm pretty sure Bob Flexner says the same thing in his book. A table will see way more moisture on top (since it will be wiped down etc).
While we often talk about wood movement, I think we discuss it from a relative humidty point of view. I'm beginning to think that intoduced moisture (from cleaning and spills) is probably a bigger issue than we give credit. Most houses are fairly climate controlled and probably don't go through huge swings in humidity.
I agree. For a table or counter, a surface that is very well sealed is of the essence. I just finished but have not installed oak kitchen counters. They have five coats of shellac (rubbed back, though), and three coats of Behlens Rock Hard (also rubbed back) to be as impervious as possible to spills and cleaning.Joe
Steve,
Does the entire top need to be a full 2" thick? Making a 1" thick top and adding a few pieces around the perimeter of the top would give the look of a 2" top. This would make the top quite a bit lighter, and with the cost savings, you should be able to use QS White Oak. I guess the real question to pose to your client is; What trade off do you prefer, not being 2" thick in the center of the top or using flat sawn material in stead of QS?
Good luck with the project,
Brent
Steve, I figure the table top is 3.27 cubic feet of wood and at 35 pounds per cubic foot it would weigh about 114 pounds, thats a lot of wood and cost if 1/4 sawn. I would certainly entertain the idea of making it look 2" thick by using filler wood around the edges for a 1-1/2" in from the edge or so like someone else suggested previously. I did this for a large desk that the client wanted a 1-3/4"" thick look. Why the 2" anyway, that looks pretty thick for a 5' table unless you ar going to put a large routed edge on it.
"a client wants a mission style table with a 5 foot diameter 2 inch thick solid white oak top".
Now that is one example of a client needing to be disabused of an impractical notion, and an example of the customer being wrong. I would explain the disadvantages of this thick top to him , and if he still insisted I would consider passing up the job. You need to know why this thickness is required: if he says for appearance then that is fair enough, and you can easily satisfy that requirement in the recognised way which is to do what Brent outlined earlier.
I would glue it up in two sessions(using one inch nominal stock) if not all at once. For anyone with some experience this size of top is not very big, but it may be convenient not to glue the whole at once.
Cupping and warping would not be a danger provided the timber is good grade, well acclimatised and correctly supported on the underside-i.e supported by battens which are fixed so that seasonal movement is catered for.Using q/s stock is always helpful and in this case you should get the medullary rays which are so attractive. And since it is q/s there would be no quandary over alternating or not alternating. (Alternating is dubious anyway- better to use decent wood and join for appearance ).
Definitely not good to use bolts/ rods etc. Properly made glued joints are perfectly sufficient.
The evil side of me keeps coming back to the idea of suggesting solid end grain instead (i.e. a 2" horizontal slice from the trunk). That would cost him about $150K for the tree, plus 15 years for cutting it down. But, you'd have lots of wood left over. ;-)
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled