# Is this feasible? (pic heavy)



## Revtap (Aug 1, 2012)

So my wife and I need a new bed frame. We could be boring and go out and buy one, or being the DIY freaks that we are, we could make one.

Probably pretty obvious which option I favor. 

I fired up Google SketchUp and started dinking around with some design concepts, before I realized that what would amount to the holy grail of designs for us in this would be a frame with no permanent joins; no adhesives nor mechanical fasteners, just wood locking into wood. This would be perfect for us partly as a design/building challenge (we're both theatre techs, so creative problem solving is practically an obsession) and partly because of events we go to that would be made much nicer by being able to just collapse the bed and bring it with us.

There is, however, one part of my design I'm uncertain of. I talked it over with my father-in-law, who has a great deal more woodworking experience than I do, and he gave a thumbs-up on the overall design but wasn't any more certain of this one part than I am. I'm not sure the top pieces on the corner posts will be able to handle the stress that the sideboards will place on them. Just wondered if anyone here could give me a more definitive answer, and suggestions for improvement if the design is just going to fall apart on me.

Parts:
































































Assembly:































































Any thoughts or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## WillemJM (Aug 18, 2011)

Interesting thought process, but that sure is one loooong way around achieving someting pretty simple.

Suggest you google bed construction for a few ideas.


----------



## Alchymist (Jan 2, 2011)

I think the ends of those notched side rails and the castellated uprights might be problematic. Overall very complex construction, will be very time consuming and difficult to get good fitup. JMHO.


----------



## Dave Paine (May 30, 2012)

+1 with the other replies.

You are going way overboard in the complexity of this design.

The slat do not need rabbits in their support rails, nor do they need to be mortised into the side rails. Looks pretty, but you may not appreciate the work you are making for yourself. This may look decorative, but likely will be covered by the sheets most of the time.

I would just screw the slats to the rails.

Lots of internet sites with plans on bed construction.

Lots of threads on this site about bed construction.

I like a beefy connection between headboard and the side rails.
Something like this.
http://www.leevalley.com/US/hardware/page.aspx?p=40445&cat=3,40842,41269&ap=1

You also need to consider future dis-assembly. Only a matter of time until you need to move the bed for whatever reason.


----------



## cabinetman (Jul 5, 2007)

You sure put some time into the thinking and the Sketchup. Interlocking joints while seemingly appear to be a rigid assembly, still allow for some racking movement. Over time, it's possible for even wedged, or pegged tenons to develop a wear factor. Your lack of fasteners will likely work, to what degree of success may depend on wood species selection and the craftsmanship of the joinery.









 







.


----------



## jigs-n-fixtures (Apr 28, 2012)

Revtap said:


> So my wife and I need a new bed frame. We could be boring and go out and buy one, or being the DIY freaks that we are, we could make one.
> 
> Probably pretty obvious which option I favor.
> 
> ...


Nothing wrong with the basic idea. Can you execute it? There are a lot of joinery there? 

Most beds are simpler, but again the majority are production pieces, where simpler joinery, and less joinery mean less hand work, with correspondingly less labor cost.

Sent from my iPhone using Wood Forum


----------



## JBSmall (Jul 6, 2012)

You are providing a huge selection of short grain for the split/crack/check-devils to play with.


----------



## Getting better (Dec 3, 2009)

I think this bed will squeek


----------



## JBSmall (Jul 6, 2012)

and creak.


----------



## SLAC_Engineer (Feb 23, 2012)

You are looking for a hardware free, tool free knock-down assembly. Your current design will have issues with racking at the corners as has already been pointed out. You need a joint that can pull everthing tight. You cant just rely on the joint fit to be tight to provide your strength. I would simplify your design and consider using through tenons on the corners with wedges (removable). And for the slats, Just have a single mid slat with a through tenon and wedge and let the other slats rest into notches.


----------



## ACP (Jan 24, 2009)

I have to agree with above, you are going to get really annoying creaks and sqeaks that will make it difficult for mommy and daddy to "wrestle" without waking up the entire house.


----------



## Woodenhorse (May 24, 2011)

Shorten the legs by half and use 6X6's instead of the 4x4's. This will lower the center of gravity and reduce the racking but not eliminate it. Although it looks like it will support a significant amount of weight your bigger problem will be lateral movement as others have mentioned. I can see those 1x1 "parapets" snapping off at just the wrong moment alerting all the neighbors to your extracurricular activities.  Use some dovetail joinery in a few places to interlock the pieces and I think it would add much more structural integrity and a bit of security to the joints.


----------



## Steve Neul (Sep 2, 2011)

Instead of running the internal rails through the legs at the corners I would just mortise and tenon them. I believe there are many more slats than are necessary. Most beds have only three or four. For astetics I wouldn't mortise the slats and other parts through the exterior skirt. The lip you have on the internal frame is sufficient to hold the slats. What you have there is the bed fully assemblied as one piece. This is fine if that is what you want however most beds are made to be unassemblied to make it easier to get the bed down a hallway and into a room.


----------



## cranbrook2 (Oct 14, 2006)

ClaraJohnson said:


> -bump-


What is with all the bumping ?? :thumbdown::thumbdown::thumbdown::thumbdown:


----------



## Steve Neul (Sep 2, 2011)

cranbrook2 said:


> What is with all the bumping ?? :thumbdown::thumbdown::thumbdown::thumbdown:


 There are people that sign up to every forum they can find for the purpose of spreading spam or other advertisment. These people are bumped from the forum. I didn't see what ClaraJohnson posted before the message was terminated but you can be sure she broke the rules.


----------



## Getting better (Dec 3, 2009)

Thanks for clearing that up. I was wondering////


----------



## Rick C. (Dec 17, 2008)

ACP said:


> I have to agree with above, you are going to get really annoying creaks and sqeaks that will make it difficult for mommy and daddy to "wrestle" without waking up the entire house.



+1 that bed's comin' down:yes:


----------



## JBSmall (Jul 6, 2012)

Yes. 
Sleep on the floor.
That's where you'll end-up anyway, sooner or later.


----------



## TooPicky (Apr 12, 2009)

I vote for the thru tenons with tapered wedges idea. Also, that would look cool, be easy to take down, and be easy to tighten up. Of course, my tastes run to the simple, clean designs........


----------



## JBSmall (Jul 6, 2012)

Dave Paine said:


> +1 with the other replies.
> 
> You are going way overboard in the complexity of this design.
> 
> ...


http://jbsmallcabinetshop.blogspot.com/2012/08/best-bed-rail-connectors.html


----------



## sopwath (Aug 9, 2012)

_Why_ are those specific rail connectors the best?


----------



## Revtap (Aug 1, 2012)

Wow, lots of replies. Thanks folks.

Lots of good info too. I'll start working on a redesign in the next day or two. Probably run with the wedged tenon idea for the posts.

A few things I'd like to address:

First, a fair number of replies apparently missed the part where I'm looking to use no fasteners whatsoever; though I'm reworking the design, that's still part of the game plan. Call it a personal challenge. I know I'm making a lot more work for myself than I necessarily have to, but honestly this is part of the fun for me.

The castellated posts were not actually my own idea; they came from Googling bed frame plans with an eye to no-fastener construction. The downside of that kind of searching is not necessarily knowing if the designs you find worked out for the person who made them.

I could use fewer slats...if we slept on a regular mattress with a box spring. But we don't; we use a futon mattress, so this is essentially a platform bed. Futon mattresses tend to accumulate moisture (and eventually mildew/mold) if they are resting on a solid platform, so lots of slats with about half of the underside of the mattress open to the air is what was recommended to me. It does look like I over-thought that part of the design, though; the mortising through the outer skirt was for the same purpose as the rabbits in the support rails (making sure the slats can't slide on the support rails).

Any suggestions as far as species? I hadn't really come to a decision on that front yet. I tend to assume oak or poplar when I'm not using pine, but given this isn't a normal sort of project, I don't think I should be making automatic assumptions.


----------



## JBSmall (Jul 6, 2012)

sopwath said:


> _Why_ are those specific rail connectors the best?


 They just are.
They are heavy cast-iron, simple to use, efficient, easily knocked-down.
Anyone else ever use them and not like them?


----------



## woodbutcher360 (Jul 1, 2012)

Bad design for a bed.


----------



## JBSmall (Jul 6, 2012)

The sketch-up, I think it's called, is disturbing, too. I want to see some Escheresque mobiusity in it.
Buildings are built off of similar truly mechanical drawings. They haunt the perfect turf.


----------



## Ryn0nTX (Jun 27, 2012)

ACP said:


> I have to agree with above, you are going to get really annoying creaks and sqeaks that will make it difficult for mommy and daddy to "wrestle" without waking up the entire house.



LMAO!!!...I just knew someone would go there...I'll keep reading!

(mumbling) " crazy @$$ jokerz,,, "


----------



## JBSmall (Jul 6, 2012)

*Topic road not taken - Do not read*



woodbutcher360 said:


> Bad design for a bed.


Check out "DESIGN" by Robert Frost.
Disturbing, too.

http://www.poemhunter.com/poem/design/

http://www.english.illinois.edu/maps/poets/a_f/frost/design.htm


----------



## TooPicky (Apr 12, 2009)

> The sketch-up, I think it's called, is disturbing, too. I want to see some Escheresque mobiusity in it.
> Buildings are built off of similar truly mechanical drawings. They haunt the perfect turf.


What the hell does this even mean? Re-state in english, please.....


----------



## Gilgaron (Mar 16, 2012)

Too picky, they mean it is overdesigned and appears physically impossible:

Escher

Mobius strip


----------



## TooPicky (Apr 12, 2009)

HUH. OK. I think there is someone out there who could pull it off. (Building it, not saying how well the design would hold up....)


----------



## Alchymist (Jan 2, 2011)

TooPicky said:


> HUH. OK. I think there is someone out there who could pull it off. (Building it, not saying how well the design would hold up....)


Most likely a number of us COULD build it, but why would we want to? :no:


----------



## JBSmall (Jul 6, 2012)

Making anything out of wood involves compromises, based on the strengths and weaknesses of this wonderful material. 
Anyone who executes that design in solid wood will learn a LOT!


----------



## Midlandbob (Sep 5, 2011)

The Japanese did some amazing joinery. The precision and results astound.
I think that was before good fasteners etc.
I wold use more traditional and reliable bed construction and do the real complex joinery if it's a goal for something like a desktop box or object that is meant to be showy.
Coffee tables etc are the place to push limits and "show off" to yourself or whoever.
But above all, enjoy.
Bob


----------



## Better Place (May 23, 2012)

Not sure if this really jives with the intent of the OP, but you could try a rope bed. If you Google "Viking Rope Bed" you will find a lot of sites that have instructions for how to make one. They meet the criteria of the OP in terms of being easy to put up/tear down as well as allowing air flow for a futon style mattress. You can make one without any hardware fasteners. About the only criteria it doesn't meet is the complexity of design. 

Here is an example site:
http://home.earthlink.net/~hovtej/Norman/VIKBED.HTM


----------



## Ryn0nTX (Jun 27, 2012)

Better Place said:


> Not sure if this really jives with the intent of the OP, but you could try a rope bed. If you Google "Viking Rope Bed" you will find a lot of sites that have instructions for how to make one. They meet the criteria of the OP in terms of being easy to put up/tear down as well as allowing air flow for a futon style mattress. You can make one without any hardware fasteners. About the only criteria it doesn't meet is the complexity of design.



Great find! I looked at the link and then did some google searches. I think the Viking Slat Bed would be exactly what you need. No nails, and a bunch of joinery... What do you think?










Here is another...


----------



## Revtap (Aug 1, 2012)

Heh, I just came on to mention finding a perfect design, but it looks like I've been beaten to the punch. I'll be building myself a viking slat bed, then (although probably without the decorative carving).

I actually know a couple people with the rope beds. They work, but the ropes apparently need constant tightening due to stretching, and even fully tightened they tend to have a hammock-style sag in the middle.


----------



## Better Place (May 23, 2012)

There ya go. 

For some reason, the slat version never crossed my mind. 

Must be a sign of something...damned if I can remember what it is though...


----------

