Replies

1. 
   RalphBarker | Dec 17, 2009 01:56pm | #1

   I'm a little confused by the
   I'm a little confused by the pictures. Is this a table top without legs, sitting on top of another table with legs? If so, the apron does seem wide, but it's hard to tell without the legs, which would separate the top from the top and the legs from the legs under the respective tops. ;-)

   I'm also confused about the function of the strip down the middle. But, at my age, I'm easily confused.

1. 
   miserybob | Dec 17, 2009 02:47pm | #4

   Ralph - Yes, I'll admit it's
   Ralph - Yes, I'll admit it's an odd duck. To be honest, I have been doing lots of Arts and Crafts stuff (nice and flat and square!) so I really wanted to push myself and do something with curves and a different architecture. The strip down the middle is purely decorative.

   It is, in fact, a table sitting on a table... my workshop is so crowded I had to bring it inside to get a decent photo!

   I'm warming up to a wider apron (per Lataxe's suggestion), but how narrow do you think I can safely (structually speaking) go?

   Thanks!

1. 
   RalphBarker | Dec 17, 2009 03:13pm | #7

   To me, aprons have both a design element and a structural one. Wider aprons provide stronger joints for tables that will be laterally stressed in use. Thin aprons can be OK on foo-foo tables that don't need to be as strong - assuming the thin apron works, design-wise.

2. 
   Lataxe | Dec 17, 2009 01:58pm | #2

   Bob,
   It's a difficult one,
   Bob,

   It's a difficult one, that. Perhaps you must do a drawin' on a piece of paper to include other parts of the potential underpinning?

   I have used 2D "parts" made to scale on graph paper then cut out so they can be arranged and potentially substituted by another cut-out of different dimension. It's my half-ersed method of building a model but it does help with these proportion thangs.

   There may be an aesthetic that works in having a "contrast" between a thin top and deep aprons; but it would need the whole table-design visible to be able to see if such proportions worked.

   I love the high-quality look of that top, part of which does lie in it's thinness. On the other hand, thin aprons, legs and so forth would make it look too spindly for me - but it's as much a matter of taste as "correct" rules of proportion.

   Lataxe

1. 
   miserybob | Dec 17, 2009 02:28pm | #3

   Lataxe,
   That's an interesting
   Lataxe,

   That's an interesting thought - I was worried that I wouldn't be able to get the apron safely thin enough to match the top.... maybe I don't have to.

   I may have to work backwards from the legs anyway (another experiment), but a deeper apron gives me more options.

   Thanks for the input!

3. 
   miserybob | Dec 17, 2009 02:48pm | #5

   By the way, Taunton, LOVE the ability to click on photos and then click through like a slideshow to the next photo. That's a nice feature!

4. 
   miserybob | Dec 17, 2009 02:57pm | #6

   Hrrmmm... I don't care for
   Hrrmmm... I don't care for the way replies and new comments are nested. It's like time travelling - later replies get stuck in between earlier ones.

   Poo-tee-weet?

   -bonus points for catching that reference ;-)!

1. 
   RalphBarker | Dec 17, 2009 03:15pm | #8

   Strike your head against the keyboard a few more times, and you'll become an indented slave, thread-wise. ;-)

   I'm accustomed to this layout from other forums, and have gotten to like it over time.

1. 
   Lataxe | Dec 17, 2009 05:11pm | #10

   For some reason the indent don't work on my screen. Everythang is at the same "tab". (I use IE7 running in Vista).

   But somehow this doesn't seem to matter too much. The order of the posts is more like a real conversation, which generally aren't neatly linear.

   ****

   Anyway, I'm hoping Bob will be able to post a diagram of his options, once the legs are dreamt.

   Lataxe

5. 
   PSeverin | Dec 17, 2009 05:03pm | #9

   It almost looks like one those tops that wants to float above the structure below. So I agree. 4" is too thick. Maybe half of that or even less. It seems to me to want a minimal structure...almost 1" square legs and stretchers...hard to do in wood, but that's the challenge.. Anyway...interesting top. I hope you find an interesting way to hold it up.

   Peter

6. 
   sapwood | Dec 17, 2009 08:52pm | #11

   This table top does not want to have a traditional apron such as you are proposing. There are numerous solutions to the non-traditional apron. I suggest that since you wish to push yourself, that you design a few yourself. Then return, if you wish, to ask for feedback on those (or that one). Asking what to do next is easy, but it's a bit like cheating yourself.

   Also: I really like the thin top juxtaposed against the rather strong looking center rib. Keep looking at that interface. The rest of the table design will follow.

7. 
   Taigert | Dec 17, 2009 09:22pm | #12

   Bob,
   This is just my opinion,
   Bob,

   This is just my opinion, I would be interested to see what it would look like with aprons with a live edge. With a shape that would compliment the center piece in the top. You could always make a curved lamination for the legs, with a slight radius. Some thing that leaves the top floating.

   Like I said my opinion, I like to step across the lines once in while as well. I need to find out how to post a picture. So I could use a picture to show you what I am thinking. For some reason I don't see a option for posting a picture with a "comment or reply"

   Taigert