# table base design help



## phaelax (Dec 24, 2018)

Been shopping for a small dining table for my newly renovated room and all the ones I've liked so far have been $2500 or more. So I thought I'd build my own. Unsure how this would turn out, I didn't want to spend a lot and decided to use 2x4 lumber. I made a 40" round table and used 1/4" dowel rod (in place of biscuits) to help join the pieces. I then wrapped it with 1/8" flat steel from home depot. Kinda going for a reclaimed, medieval look.

Now I'm working on the base and this is where I'm uncertain of how to proceed. The center support will be about 6x6" and use trestle style feet (in the pic, made of doubled up 2x6) If I do a center lap on the two feet, how should I secure the center post on top? I feel like just putting screws into it from the bottom wouldn't be secure enough.

Random pic from internet, but illustrates the basic design of what I'm going for. This pic shows pockethole screws, but I feel it wouldn't take much sideways torque to break. Then again, I also have a tendency to over-engineer my designs, thus I have a fish tank stand that could support a truck.




















Wish I had a bandsaw, easier than using a table saw and belt sander.


----------



## JRboostGSR (Mar 25, 2018)

phaelax said:


> Been shopping for a small dining table for my newly renovated room and all the ones I've liked so far have been $2500 or more. So I thought I'd build my own. Unsure how this would turn out, I didn't want to spend a lot and decided to use 2x4 lumber. I made a 40" round table and used 1/4" dowel rod (in place of biscuits) to help join the pieces. I then wrapped it with 1/8" flat steel from home depot. Kinda going for a reclaimed, medieval look.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




For working with what you have you did a great job!!!
Merry Christmas’s




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Pineknot_86 (Feb 19, 2016)

Nice table! I like the metal band and bolt heads to make a rustic look. One can make a lot with 2x4s.


----------



## GeorgeC (Jul 30, 2008)

I would fasten 24" 2"x2" to each side and use lag bolts to fasten these to the top.


George


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*Use angle iron ....*

You could use two pieces of 2" angle running the same direction as the boards, and screw them up into the bottom. Bolt them across the 6" x 6" column for strength, don't use screws. You must run them in line with the boards or wood shrinkage will cause issues. :vs_cool:


----------



## gmercer_48083 (Apr 9, 2016)

I would use 1/2 lap joint on the legs to create the X for the legs, and a similar X that is 1/2 lapped for attaching the table top. The second thing I would do is to make the pedestal using two 6x6 and two 2x2's leaving a hollow through the center. Then use an all thread through the center to hold the two X parts to the pedestal with the nuts countersunk into the X parts. Then attach the top using screws upward through the upper X braces. The table could be disassembled easily later for storage/moving, and would be extremely strong.


----------



## shoot summ (Feb 21, 2014)

You could put a piece of 2x2 3/4" ply screwed to the top of the base, then screw that to the bottom of the table.


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*I suggested angle iron above .....*

If you use the angle to support the table, then to keep the rustic look that is around the table edge, I would introduce it in the base as well. 

It can be used to reinforce the joint itself or as decorative trim on the legs. 



Maybe some ideas here:
https://www.google.com/search?q=tab...zrvfAhUJ7IMKHVmhC3EQ_AUIDygC&biw=1920&bih=966


----------



## phaelax (Dec 24, 2018)

I like that idea. I was planning to incorporate some steel bands around the base somehow anyway, so that would work while reinforcing it. Now I gotta find me some steel to play with.


----------



## shoot summ (Feb 21, 2014)

Have to watch your clearances and table height, 2" angle iron would not feel good if you hit it with your knees.

I don't think it will show enough to actually contribute to the rustic look. 

It will be a solid way to mount it though.

I would consider putting some metal flats on the sides of the table base, maybe shape the ends for decoration, then add some of the bolts like the table edge.


----------



## phaelax (Dec 24, 2018)

I remade the feet. I felt the size would be too inadequate for the size of the table. Feet were 24" wide with a 40" table top. Feet are now 32" so that gives me 4" of overhang.

I used 2x6 lumber to form the center of the pedestal but ran into an issue when gluing. One of the boards I cut had a slight cup to it and when I clamped the 3 boards together (without glue), it looked like I'd be able to pull it out. So I glued it all up and clamped it together. Few minutes later I hear a snap! So yea, it took the cupping out of that board, unfortunately it wasn't for very long.

So now I have to go to the store and buy another 8' board just so I can get 25" out of it... Either way, my table is still less than $100 so far.


----------



## phaelax (Dec 24, 2018)

Got the center post for the base done, still need to round off the sharp edges just a bit. I did a mortise and tenon joint to attach it to the feet along with glue. Cut the tenon with a table saw and the mortise was mostly by chisel. My router bit would only go about an inch deep. My first mortise n tenon joint, worked out better than I expected but less clean than I would have liked. Crappy chisel on soft pine and I don't know how to get a smooth bottom inside a 2" hole as I can't exactly chisel out the bottom at an angle from that depth. Still, it was a good snug fit. Won't just slide in but doesn't need hammered in either so I'm calling it a win.


----------



## gmercer_48083 (Apr 9, 2016)

Nice.


----------



## Dylan Buffum (Dec 2, 2018)

I like your mortise and tenon. I think so long as the sides are snug and flush, the joint will be strong even if the bottom is a little rough. You could maybe use a urethane glue to expand and fill any gaps underneath? You might also consider doweling right through the bottom as an additional fortification?

As to attaching the top, I like the idea of mimicking the steel edge of the table, but with angle iron and lag bolts. You could also fortify that with dowels.


----------



## phaelax (Dec 24, 2018)

What I think I'll do is make some curved wooden braces for the bottom and top. The bottom feet are doubled up 2x6s, the top support are going to be doubled up 2x4s cut down slightly with the same lap joint as the bottom. I still plan to incorporate the steel in it somehow, maybe as just trim pieces down the centers of the supports.


----------



## FrankC (Aug 24, 2012)

You could make the angle four braces at the base from ornamental flat iron to tie it in with the top.


----------



## phaelax (Dec 24, 2018)

It'd be cool to make my own, but I don't an acetylene torch to heat the iron. When I got out of the service, I lost all my fun toys! There's a couple of antique shops around town I might look at and see what I can find.


----------



## FrankC (Aug 24, 2012)

phaelax said:


> It'd be cool to make my own, but I don't an acetylene torch to heat the iron. When I got out of the service, I lost all my fun toys! There's a couple of antique shops around town I might look at and see what I can find.


Shelf brackets?


----------



## phaelax (Dec 24, 2018)

I thought about that too, but I'd want them to be at least a couple inches wide otherwise I think they wouldn't look right with the 5" wide feet. So far, I'm invested about $80 into the table for all the materials, plus the cost of the stain and urethane which is probably another $50. If everything turns out well, I may invest in some walnut and make it again.




> You must run them in line with the boards or wood shrinkage will cause issues.


Oh and in regards to an earlier comment about mounting the top, I was actually planning on running perpendicular to the top boards as I think it would be more structurally stable. As for the wood shrinking or expanding, I understand that can happen (though not sure to the extent with kiln dried dimensional lumber) but the steel band is already going to prevent that. No room for expansion, and the lag bolts around the edge I think would minimize its ability to shrink. So basically, the damage is already done.


----------



## FrankC (Aug 24, 2012)

Yes, run the top supports perpendicular, I would still give the mounting holes room for wood to move if it wants or can, one less factor in boards splitting over time.


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*Use slotted or elongated holes*



phaelax said:


> .......
> 
> Oh and in regards to an earlier comment about mounting the top,* I was actually planning on running perpendicular to the top boards as I think it would be more structurally stable*. As for the wood shrinking or expanding, I understand that can happen (though not sure to the extent with kiln dried dimensional lumber) but the steel band is already going to prevent that. No room for expansion, and the lag bolts around the edge I think would minimize its ability to shrink. So basically, the damage is already done.


The band around the top won't stop any movement. Wood always wins, it will either shrink and crack or expand and buckle. Wood doesn't move in it's length, just across it's width which is why I suggested running the metal lengthwise. However, you can use slotted holes and run them perpendicular to allow for movement. Use washers under your screws and allow about 1/4" extra either by filing the holes into slots or using a larger drill size and the washers.




FrankC said:


> Yes, run the top supports perpendicular, I would still *give the mounting holes room for wood to move *if it wants or can, one less factor in boards splitting over time.


This is what Frank is suggesting by "room to move".


----------



## Tennessee Tim (Dec 15, 2010)

woodnthings said:


> The band around the top won't stop any movement. Wood always wins, it will either shrink and crack or expand and buckle. Wood doesn't move in it's length, just across it's width which is why I suggested running the metal lengthwise. However, you can use slotted holes and run them perpendicular to allow for movement. Use washers under your screws and allow about 1/4" extra either by filing the holes into slots or using a larger drill size and the washers.
> 
> This is what Frank is suggesting by "room to move".


YES it will move as the above have posters have stated AND as woodnthings said "...IT WILL WIN..." ..... I am for the perpendicular slotted support for a couple of reasonings... We put skirts and breadboards under/on/end of tops for a reason... it helps support a flatness in the wood across the grain. I've seen a few tops that didn't need it BUT I've seen more that wished they'd supported perpendicular.....think about it ...IF it wasn't important many manufactures WOULD NOT spend the extra money for them!!! WE WOULDN'T have them incorporated into our trestles...our round tops would JUST be on a center post.....food for thought!!! There are lots of old traditional reasons behind why THEY done it that way in the past!!!! Wood MOVES....always HAS and always WILL !!!! Simple prep/joinery work makes this issue manageable !!!!

Enjoy the build!!! I like the metal AND wood!!! Please keep us posted with pics and decisions!!!


----------



## 35015 (Nov 24, 2012)

Hi Phaelax,

I've been following along, but felt you started going down a path "of your own" on design and I didn't want to fluster your creative flow at all...

Your project looks great, and is interesting!!!

Nevertheless, because its a "mix and mash" of modern and mix traditional methods from design to a "plastic finish" on the work, I thought it best to just "read and follow along" for the most part. 

Now you are getting into the realm of "wood movement" challenges that Tim (et al) are speaking to...AND ITS VERY IMPORTANT...to heed that advise...!!!!

I will expand on it below, and more if you ask...



phaelax said:


> ...As for the wood shrinking or expanding, I understand that can happen (though not sure to the extent with kiln dried dimensional lumber) ...


It's not a matter of "can happen" it is a ... "will happen." That is a simple reality like 1+1=2...This is not a maybe and/or if...!!!...Wood moves...period. 

Unless you have gone down the "rabbit hole" of fully traditional work (and understanding)...and have the ability to read wood grain and patters well enough to tell the top of the tree from the root just by reading the grain...have selected each piece or wood in your project to be in full balance with the piece next to it, as well as, gone for mostly (or all) quarter sawn wood...You really can't give any detail assurance to when and how this wood will move...Other than it will...

And...since it is "kiln dried" the actuality of it contracting/shirking is unlikely. Any warp or movement will (most likely?) be related to its movement in expansion...



phaelax said:


> .....but the steel band is already going to prevent that. No room for expansion, and the lag bolts around the edge I think would minimize its ability to shrink... ...


I was kind of lost there with that part of you post???

However if you meant the "steel bands" are going to "prevent" the movement of the wood, that again is not really accurate, or likely to be the outcome ever...

The absolute best it will (most likely?) do is inhibit some movement, at its best. Again, this has the probability of that being in expansion....not contraction (aka shrinkage)...

In closing, one way to really "think well" about wood used within a project is to pretend that you are building the entire project out of..."green wood!!!" This is actually how I would build the project with only traditional joinery, not glue or hardware and only rough lumber fresh from my local Sawyer or my own mill...

If you condition yourself to think of wood in its "green state" and plan out the joinery to compensate for that movement as it dries and stabilizes, the projects you do will be much more enduring over time..


----------



## phaelax (Dec 24, 2018)

> I was kind of lost there with that part of you post???


So the table top is comprised of 2x4 lumber, doweled and glued together. I have a steel band around the outer edge of the table, held in place by a lag screw every 6". This metal band will not give room for the boards to expand, and the screws holding the edges to the metal band would fight any shrinkage. If the wood did expand, the only outcome I could see is the boards buckling up.

I'm not saying this was a good thing, I'm just saying I've already done the damage so at this point would it really matter how the top fastens to base support? But I can easily just make bigger holes or slots for the support to screw to the bottom of the table, giving it a little room to move.

I drew an image to show how my table is constructed, maybe that will help clarify why I think it's too late to consider wood movement.


----------



## 35015 (Nov 24, 2012)

Hi Phaelax



phaelax said:


> ...So the table top is comprised of 2x4 lumber, doweled and glued together...


Seems straight forward...

Are you keeping track if the boards are oriented with the "bark side" up? 

Do you understand the different "schools of thought and/or tradition" for why this is the dominant modality...compared to either "alternate" or "pith up only" more contemporary approaches found in America...

The doweling is to keep alignment?

Are these following the "rule of thumb" 1/3-1/3-1/3? If not, what is your reasoning for the way you have chosen?

The glue is a choice, but not a necessity....
I too, often glue such diaphragm type structures, yet just as often I don't. The following is a "design aesthetic" suggestion/question regarding the "industrial look" you seem to be going for? I like it to be clear! As such, gluing up the 2x stock is not a requisite for this type of design motif, nor adding any significance structurally to the build in this projects case...and...could even detract from the "rustic charm" by not allowing some minimal gaping to occur between the boards...



phaelax said:


> ...I have a steel band around the outer edge of the table, held in place by a lag screw every 6"...


If for looks, that I can understand...I would suggest it is falling some place between "over kill" and a bad idea...
There is a very reasonable chance this is going to give the piece some significant challenges over time by causing end grain splitting issues. This isn't a guess, I would offer, as I have seen several similar builds and when the "end grain" is screwed or lagged in this fashion, the fasteners commonly caused the ends to split...



phaelax said:


> ...This metal band will not give room for the boards to expand, and the screws holding the edges to the metal band would fight any shrinkage... ...


I know Tim (and others) where trying to get..."wood movement"...accross in their posts. I took note of this, and the primary reason I engaged in the conversation...

As such, the metal band (as it is presented) will do very little to arrest any significant movement, and/or cause 
issues already offered...This is not speculation. If wood wants to move, (and it does) its going to move...

There are very rare (and I only know of traditional methods) that can even begin to even significantly arrest and/or retard wood movement, and that is only with very key selections in wood species, grain, and joinery considerations...and finishing modalities all working in concert with one another...

"Timber Strapping" methods have been with us almost as long as the art of "metal work" has been part of our material world. This would have been the preferred and recommended modality for the strap around the table, and should you do another, this is the method I would recommend...or a version there of...since it is much stronger (generally) and allows for the requisite adjusting that will come with time.

In versions of your table I have done in the past, this band and the method of adjustment is the reason there is no reason for gluing the boards to each other......












phaelax said:


> ... If the wood did expand, the only outcome I could see is the boards buckling up...


If this is "kiln dried" stock and not exceedingly well acclimated to the final reality atmosphere, it is not, nor ever can be...if. 

Wood (again) is going to move...period. How much is a calculable and even (with experience) some what well predictable...even in direction with each season as it expands and contracts within a given project. This cyclic movement was well considered and understood by those traditional builders before us. 
I am please that you could see, "the boards buckling." That is not the "only" possible outcome as that is just one of the possibility in this type of circular build (soon to be a slight ellipse in some probability.)

I would add, just to get the point home, that if a "kiln dried" wood floor (as just one example) can push the entire end of a building off and snap multipe joints within a timber frame, your band will do little to stop the wood from moving...if it wants too? 



phaelax said:


> ...I'm not saying this was a good thing, I'm just saying I've already done the damage so at this point would it really matter how the top fastens to base support? ...


Short answer...yes it does matter...



phaelax said:


> ... But I can easily just make bigger holes or slots for the support to screw to the bottom of the table, giving it a little room to move. ...


That is, at this stage, most likely the only option. Yet I would offer, since it looks like you have done the design work in CAD, actually seeing the methods of joinery in the rest of the project would be enlightening and worth consideration (perhaps?) for other possibilities...

Hope this was of some assistance...


----------



## phaelax (Dec 24, 2018)

> Are you keeping track if the boards are oriented with the "bark side" up?
> 
> Do you understand the different "schools of thought and/or tradition" for why this is the dominant modality...compared to either "alternate" or "pith up only" more contemporary approaches found in America...
> 
> ...


Haven't a clue what you're talking about. The dowels were more of a thought to add strength.


----------



## 35015 (Nov 24, 2012)

phaelax said:


> Haven't a clue what you're talking about. The dowels were more of a thought to add strength.


The dowels can add strength when oriented properly. Mainly they keep the boards (floor or otherwise) aligned and not shifting about next to each other so they work in concert with each other as a single diaphragm of wood. Even splined/T&g floors and tops are toggled or doweled sometimes for the same reason...

*"rule of thumb" 1/3-1/3-1/3*

Followed to where the dowel goes in each board/plank and why it goes there...

Grain pattern orientation has a great deal to do with how a top like yours is going to perform over time or even last. That's why I asked how you oriented the boards and why you chose the method you use (if any at all?)


----------



## phaelax (Dec 24, 2018)

Pretty much chose that method because it's the only method I know of. And dowels I can do without special tools, unlike biscuits. As for my decision about the placement of dowels, I just evenly distributed 3 dowels across each 4' board. Is that what you mean by rule of thumb 1/3? So my actual table doesn't match perfectly to my illustration as the end pieces may only have 1 dowel in it rather than 2 or 3 simply because they were cut out when I made the circle. As for board orientation, the lumber pretty much all looked the same to me so I just picked the sides that looked nicer and put them to the top. I also tried to limit the number of knots on the sides of the boards that would be glued.


The metal band and screws were more for aesthetics than anything else.

At one point I did consider drilling holes completely through the boards and sliding them onto 4' dowels rather than using a bunch of little ones.


----------



## FrankC (Aug 24, 2012)

You can't do much about your top now, it is going to do what is is going to do, if anything the boards will shrink and possibly crack somewhat, it is a rustic design and that will not really take away from it. Invest in some placemats to keep crumbs out of the cracks, enjoy the table and look at it as a learning experience.


----------



## phaelax (Dec 24, 2018)

> Invest in some placemats to keep crumbs out of the cracks


hah, I was wondering about how much of a hassle that was going to be to clean. The 3 coats of urethane feel like it's filled and smoothed out some of the smaller cracks, I guess I'll see.

My next project may likely be a wooden sled, to replace the one I smashed yesterday trying to play with the kids. Turns out the weight limit is subject to change if you go airborne off a hill. My back is still feeling it today.


----------



## 35015 (Nov 24, 2012)

phaelax said:


> ......And dowels I can do without special tools, unlike biscuits. As for my decision about the placement of dowels, I just evenly distributed 3 dowels across each 4' board. Is that what you mean by rule of thumb 1/3? ...


This "rule" is more a guide and differs depending on application and loads. It more to do with sizing the dowel to thickness of plank or board...



phaelax said:


> ... As for board orientation, the lumber pretty much all looked the same to me so I just picked the sides that looked nicer and put them to the top. I also tried to limit the number of knots on the sides of the boards that would be glued...


It is not something many today in woodworking typially do take note of. You will read in old books (and in good ones today) that this orientation has an effect on the performance of the furniture and/or how it will behave as it moves seasonally...



phaelax said:


> ...
> The metal band and screws were more for aesthetics than anything else. ...


It will be interesting to see how these work out for you over time. They look interesting and it gives it an industrial craft look...



phaelax said:


> ...
> At one point I did consider drilling holes completely through the boards and sliding them onto 4' dowels rather than using a bunch of little ones. ...


That would have actually been a pretty good idea and there are traditional forms of this...I would not glue them in this orientation (typically) but leave them as an alignment joint. 

That was actually really insightful to think of that!...Good Job!


----------



## phaelax (Dec 24, 2018)

Hadn't touched the table for a few weeks, but I got it assembled this afternoon. I had a little trouble finishing the base and I'm not sure why. I used a pre-stain before applying the walnut stain. I rubbed the stain on twice actually because the first coat was not nearly as dark as the top came out to be. Even now I think it's still lighter and I don't know why. After the fact, I did realize I used a water-based pre-stain by accident and not the oil one I had, so maybe that affected the oil stain?

I don't have a picture of this, but the two cross members under the table fit in a lap joint with a 4" lag screw through the center into the top of the base to secure it. I didn't glue it in case the table can't be maneuvered through doorways and has to be disassembled. Then the four supporting members have a lag screw to secure the table top. 

I still have a little metal work to do, but this is what I have for now.


----------

