Moderators: Random Orbital Bob, nev, CHJ, Noel, Charley

 Reply
By D_W
#1333749
Steve Maskery wrote:I saw an advert for a Shaker Bar Stool once! They'll be making Shaker condoms next...


I'm waiting for the Tesla Model 3, Shaker edition. Aged cherry paint with virtue signaling turn indicators.
By D_W
#1333750
MikeG. wrote:I'll be watching this one closely. It looks an interesting project.

But Shaker? I mean "Shaker" gets added to all sorts of simple panel work as though no-one else ever did panels, but I've never seen "Shaker" added to such an ornate table leg arrangement as that. Shaker furniture was all about stripped back simplicity. I may well be wrong, but if anyone can post an image of a genuine Shaker table that looks anything like this I'll be mightily surprised.


https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/shak/hd_shak.htm

There were some shaker bits with turned elements and curves, but they were probably the minority. Not sure if the shakers and quakers at the time knew they were building a strong brand for future boutique furniture makers (some of the shaker makers in maine charge nosebleed prices - snooty and I guess targeted at doofus customers who don't find anything strange about $12,000 boutique made case work called "shaker" that most amateurs could build).
By Woody2Shoes
#1333757
AJB Temple wrote:Well - the old original birdcage tables I have seen in real life have neither rotated nor tilted. That is not to say that they didn't at one time I suppose. They certainly were making rotating candle stands to go up and down on a screw at that time, and also more rudimentary candle and rush taper holders that could be adjusted for height.

For anyone who has the book, look at Figure 3.184 on page 297. Very high quality birdcage with four turned posts and arches, and an elaborate through centre post. Clearly not designed to tilt in that case.


I wish I had a copy of your book!

The antique ones that have passed through my family have usually rotated and mostly tilted (unless bodged by some repairer). I suspect that there is a difference between US and European designs and between the use envisaged when they were first made (e.g. tea or candles!).

There are a couple of common themes for the antique ones:
- there is very often an iron re-inforcement under the base of the tripod - perhaps sometimes added later;
- there are often repairs near the feet where the short-grain of the curved leg has proved (almost literally) to be an achilles heel.

Cheers, W2S
User avatar
By Eric The Viking
#1333762
AJB Temple wrote:My medieval refectory table is getting on for 4 inches thick on the top and the legs and braces are what one might call sturdy.


That's so that when it was turned over in a fight, the arrowheads wouldn't stick out at the back.

I've got me coat...

E.
User avatar
By Jacob
#1333768
Woody2Shoes wrote:.......
Here's a design (a bit chunky but could be refined) for a dining table which is essentially a pair these pedestals supporting one tabletop:

https://www.barkerandstonehouse.co.uk/d ... 797-91502/

Cheers, W2S
Exactly! But slender Shaker style.
I still don't like it but its better without the stretcher and stronger with 2 extra legs.
User avatar
By Jacob
#1333775
Woody2Shoes wrote:
AJB Temple wrote:Well - the old original birdcage tables I have seen in real life have neither rotated nor tilted. That is not to say that they didn't at one time I suppose. They certainly were making rotating candle stands to go up and down on a screw at that time, and also more rudimentary candle and rush taper holders that could be adjusted for height.

For anyone who has the book, look at Figure 3.184 on page 297. Very high quality birdcage with four turned posts and arches, and an elaborate through centre post. Clearly not designed to tilt in that case.


I wish I had a copy of your book!......
Only £12 and 579 pages!: https://www.abebooks.co.uk/servlet/Book ... 0551618985
A lot of these classics come cheap after a while as interested parties rush out and buy them when first published, in larger quantities than you imagine.
I've done it myself and very few hold their price. I probably paid a tenner 2nd hand. Most books are first editions which may surprise some, but it's because they never make it to a 2nd edition, so don't get over excited!
Some do hold price: I bought this new for £30 or so when it first came out https://www.amazon.co.uk/Country-Furnit ... 0300063962 and it's worth every penny, a real gem of a book.
On the other hand I bought this when it was out of print and highly collectable, £100 plus, but now back in print for peanuts! I paid £30 ish I think. https://wordery.com/swedish-carving-tec ... 1627106733
Also a gem!
User avatar
By Steve Maskery
#1333795
Right, where were we before we got side-tracked? Ah yes, improving on nature.

There are a couple of places where the balance of pippiness is not as good as I would like, such as here:

bald patch.JPG


So I rough cut a little patch from some waste and I think it will improve things a bit.

cut patch.JPG


But it's a one-way journey!

routing recess.JPG


Fingers crossed...

recess and patch.JPG


And after a couple of more as well, whaddayano?

inlaid pippy.JPG


So then it just biscuiting and gluing and clamping up

clamping.JPG


I have a nice even line of glue all the way along.

glueline.JPG


That'll be it for a while. It's clear I have to finalise the design but if I do stick with this, and I do like it, I will need a very particular board for the columns, which I do not yet have. I'm going to leave the top untrimmed until the end. I'm still mulling over whether to have the end square or slightly curved, and the edges square or slightly bevelled under.

Decisions, decisions.

So I'll probably get on with another project for a while. I have far too many doors to make (two pairs for Ray, 6 for myself - glad I bought a Domino) and I need a new bench, preferably before the woodworm season gets underway again.

But feel free to continue discussing the design, I'm genuinely grateful for your very constructive criticisms.
By Fitzroy
#1333830
The difference between experience and noob! I would never have though you could cut such a patch to balance up two boards. Looking good so far.

Fitz.
User avatar
By Pete Maddex
#1333838
Steve Maskery wrote:Well, when so many experienced people, whose opinions I (normally! :D ) respect tell me I'm wrong, I should listen.

So I've beefed it up at both ends, The leg is now 25mm taller at the dovetail end and the top rails are now 95mm deep, set as a bridle joint.

What do you think? Click to enlarge:

dining table 3.png


That's better but I liked the round tops of the original, it looks a bit top heavy now.
Round tops with a upright stretcher fixed to the cleats underneath the top would look lighter.
Link the legs together at the top as well.


Pete
User avatar
By Steve Maskery
#1333840
I've just been down to take the clamps off and scrape the glue. The glue line is perfect, but the top is not flat. It's a bit crowned at one end. Not by much, 1-2mm over its width at the most, but I was hoping for skating rink flat. It is, at the other end. We'll see how it settles. I think that that much will pull down onto those cross-piece thingies. Somebody must know what they are called? Cross rails? Braces? Goingacrossbits?
User avatar
By ColeyS1
#1333841
Smart job adding the extra pippyness. Adding plastic packers under the clamps are something that catches me out all to often.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
User avatar
By Steve Maskery
#1333843
Pete Maddex wrote:
That's better but I liked the round tops of the original, it looks a bit top heavy now.
Round tops with an upright stretcher fixed to the cleats underneath the top would look lighter.
Link the legs together at the top as well.

Pete

I'm afraid I don't understand you, Pete, and I'd like to do so.

Ah yes, the penny has just dropped whilst typing this. I get what you are suggesting, I think, but the more I add at the top, the heavier it is, and, just as importantly, the higher the Centre of Gravity.

I'll have a play in SU.

S
User avatar
By TheTiddles
#1333870
Shaker style always makes me smile, the shakers were a very small community living in a small area in a very frugal and highly regimented way, as such the style is very specific (and heavily orientated around that peg rail you can see in the pictures already posted). So, no there isn't really such a thing as shaker style fitted kitchen, tv unit (more amusingly), or my all time favourite... a drinks cabinet!

As for the legs, a discrete metal plate let in under the joint would stress relieve the joint effectively. Not everything needs to be built like a Russian tank (says the man with the 150kg dining table)

Aidan
User avatar
By Steve Maskery
#1333872
Hey! Aidan! Where have you been?! Nice of you to drop in. Do it more often.
I think that a couple of discrete plates would be a good idea, and I would make sure that they are also discreet. :)
User avatar
By TheTiddles
#1333878
Fair enough, discrete metal plates may not be useful!

I have a 3-way mitre joint on my coffee table that I was going to put a metal plate under, till I realised that as the legs cantilevered, it would be in compression not tension and therefore useless

Aidan