# Questions on table proportions and size



## gthec (Oct 9, 2012)

Hi Folks

Hey, I’m new to this forum and new to woodworking so please indulge my newbieness and questionable questions.

I’m in the process of building a table in a woodshop adult class I’m taking. It’s at a local high school and they have all the tools and machinery I’ll need for my project. 

I bought some wood from a reclaimed wood lumber yard in the area. My goal is to build a sort of modern design trestle table for but with a rustic quality as a result of the reclaimed lumber. (The attached photo shows one of the designs I like).

My questions are,

can I pull off this sort of “look” but fit 8 people? 
Does the center trestle need to be wide enough to fit 1 person or 3 and if so will their knees be hitting the trestle. 
What width should the trestle be? 
Can the trestle be more narrow to avoid the knee problem?
Am I missing anything else?

I have the boards for the top in progress. At the shop I have rough cut to length, jointered and planed them. I’m not locked into any one design yet and I’m happy to change things around as necessary. I appreciate answers to my questions but feel free to offer any suggestions you might have even if it alters my design.

Right now, for dimensions I’m thinking: 80x36x29
Attached are photos of my wood (before planiing, etc) and a table design that I'm thinking of.
Thanks so much!
Greg


----------



## jschaben (Apr 1, 2010)

Can't answer your question directly but this is kind of an interesting read and may give you something to consider:
http://www.geom.uiuc.edu/~demo5337/s97b/art.htm


----------



## sawdustfactory (Jan 30, 2011)

Plus one to using the golden ratio. Just about anything you find pleasing to the eye usually nails it. No set fast rule for how wide the center stretcher needs to be. Good luck, be safe and post pics when finished.


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*how many chairs?*

You can have 3 chairs along the side and none on the ends. Or by setting the trestle legs inward you can have one one on either end. It all depends on the look you want. As far as the length at 80", it would help to have the chairs you intend to use, line them up and have someone sit in each as see how much elbow room is necessary. Larger adults need more room 
The width at 36" seems a bit narrow leaving only 18" per person, but may be adequate. Wider at 40", will leave a larger center portion for serving trays and such. 
If you can find a book called Architectural Standards it will give dimensions for tables if I recall. If not, a trial and error process to see what suits your application would probably work just as well....I donno?
A mock up of a piece of plywood on saw horses would be a starting point. The design in the photo looks great! Very simple and clean and would work well in any material. JMO.


----------



## gthec (Oct 9, 2012)

*Thanks, it's the base design that's throwing me...*

Thanks for getting back guys. This is great info. Yeah, I'm struggling the most with the base design. The finite element is the length(at 80 inches tops). The width is not as big a deal in that we have side tables in my dining room to hold extra food etc. I'm kind of going for a "long" look for the table.

I have played around with other base designs including a Stickley 622 and one with with a floating top but the tricky part is with the 80". What design works best and fits 3 chairs on the side? Should I rule out the pedestal Idea? etc.

I have attached my very amature sketchup treatments trying to figure out how I can fit my parameters. Thanks again. Greg


----------



## GeorgeC (Jul 30, 2008)

To me the table in the picture has a top that is too thin. You need to add some edge treatment that will make the top look thicker.

George


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*Your top illustration is my choice*

By having the legs visible and at the corners, there is no mystery where they are. This helps to avoid them when locating your chair and sitting next to someone on the end. You knees may clash with the end person's, but that's a bit softer than with a hidden trestle underneath.:laughing: That would be my choice, the farmer's table vs the trestle table.
Having said that...
The trestle table has easier access to getting into a chair since you can come in from the side rather than having to pull the chair out far enough to clear the legs. So, I can appreciate your dilemma. :yes:


----------



## cabinetman (Jul 5, 2007)

I would go for this design...







It's on the basic theme of a Parsons table. It would provide the most leg room, and overall support.









 







.


----------



## FrankC (Aug 24, 2012)

Eight people will not fit comfortably around a 36 X 80 inch formal dining table, draw out your table and then cut out some 12" X 18" rectangular placemats to scale, you will see that it is a six person table. 

A second consideration is the size of standard table cloths and how they will hang over the edges of the table, two common sizes are 60 X 102, for 42 X 84 top, and 60 X 126 for 42 X 108 top.


----------



## gthec (Oct 9, 2012)

*four legs is the way (I think)*

Hi Folks,

Per Woodnthings I have the boards sitting up on a couple saw horses (see photos). Right now the boards are about 82 x 13 x 2. The ends will need some cleaning up so I'll lose an inch or so. So yes, I think 4 legs might be the way to go. I have no idea how to handle the apron and leg design yet but will consult. I really liked the pedestal idea but it seems limiting. One aside; Most of the time it will be a max of 6 people and last time I checked, there are only 4 of us in the immediate family. 

Monday I work on the top and I'll have next week to think about material and design the base. Even though the top is thick (1 3/4"), because it's pine, it's relatively light. So my next group of questions will probably be about the design of the legs, attaching them and bracing the bottom. I'll start shopping for some plans and welcome any ideas of course. Thanks again all. You have been very helpfull! I'll post photos as I progress.

Greg


----------

