I am building a pair of Craftsman style nightstands in cherry and have created a CAD model from a photo I found. I am trying to nail down the proportions without having any dimensions to work with.
My model has a 16″ x 16″ top, 1″ overhand at top, 25 1/2″ tall, legs are 1 3/4″ square, slats are 3/4″ square. I am thinking that I may want to go to 1 1/2″ or 1 5/8″ legs but was looking to get other’s opinions.
I’d appreciate any input on the legs or other dimensions.
Thanks,
Steve
Replies
For the size you are looking at, I would use the "Golden ratio", that is 29" tall, divided by 1.62, giving you approximately 18" wide.
Similar for the top, it would be 18" x 12", which is close to the "golden rectangle".
For my taste, the one in your drawing is a bit too "boxy" and in contradiction to the harmony of nature, which is more pleasing to the eye.
Not sure which CAD you are using and don't want to give away my secrets. Have you ever tried taking a picture and pasting it into Autocad, then stretching it out to your exact sizes? All which remains are the cut-lists :-)
Edited 7/9/2005 3:58 pm ET by Willie Martins
Thanks for your comments Willie.
I'll toy with my CAD model's dimensions and see what it looks like with the your suggestions. It does seem that 29" may be a bit tall for our bed however, and 12" deep may be too shallow, I need to keep functionality in mind as well.
I am basically trying to duplicate what is in the photo, and looking for other's trained eyes to take a guess at it's dimensions.
I do have Autocad also, perhaps I will try to import the photo.
Thanks again,
Steve
Steve, you can also scale the photo to itself if a replica is what you want. Use a ruler to determine what the parts are to themselves in the photo. It leaves you not with an exact size but a clue to what the value or "weight" of the pieces should be. I believe you then have an intuitive area to create in rather than a need to duplicate. Aloha, mike
Mike: Thanks, actually I did generate my CAD model by scaling the photo. It's just tough to nail down the 1/8"s and 1/4"s that make all the difference, especially when I have absolutely no dimensions to start with.
R13: I'm thinking that the 3/8" depth for the slats may be a little narrow due to the thickness of the aprons (looking for about 1/16" reveal), but I'll certainly give it a look. Thanks.
Well, I threw together a mock-up real quick with scraps, brad nailer, and glue gun. The mock-up is 25 1/2" tall, top is 16" square (3/4 thick, will be 7/8" in real table), slats are 5/8" wide (they overhang on the inside because they were ripped from 3/4 ply, this would obviously not look like this on the finished table). The legs are 1 1/2" square. I also added some veneer, where I am considering making through tenons.
I don't think I'm far off now, it will be easy to see the impact of any changes with the mock-up. Any thoughts on the mock-up?
Steve
Steve,
I had this problem last summer/fall
Kind of a similar project----but mine was a somewhat shaker style table-------except the table top has a piece of green slate inset in the top.
My original intention was to work within the confines of the golden ratio
It QUICKLY became apparent that the golden ratio would not be practical or pleasing in this sitution.---my particular table sits on tapered legs and the slate COULD make it a bit physically top heavy and "tippy" if I stuck with a golden ratio situation.
what ended up working for me was a floor to table top hieght of 26&3/4"-----the table top is 18x 19&3/4" ( the size of the available slate partially dictated this)
the table legs are about 1&1/2" in the square and taper to just about 3/4" at the floor
Physically it is very well balanced, but also supprising "light and airy" for the volume it occupies and being topped in stone.
I later located some more green slate, also some purple slate and a wonderfull piece of black slate. I am slowly building 3 more similar tables---one in quarter sawn white oak, another in curly cherry( the prototype was in cherry) and another in tiger maple.
Drawing EVERYTHING up full scale allowed me to see that the golden rectangle idea was not going to work , BEFORE I started cutting wood. ( or slate . LOL)
Best wishes, Stephen
1 3/4 legs for a 29" high table would be a bit heavy in my taste. I'd go max 1 1/2 and taper them down to 1" at the bottom.
I wouldn't worry about using phi to calculate the table depth. 16-18" wide is plenty, go with a depth that looks right with the bed. A square top is just fine. You can always use phi to break up the table into parts--say use phi to balance the width with the height of the table up to the drawer bottom. For a 29" high table with about 5.5-6" for the table top and drawer, you would have about 23-23.5" (under the drawer). This would go well with a width of about 16". Then the drawer and top have proportions of about 2*phi to the drawer height.
This is one of the tricks about using phi. If you study the ancients, you will find the ratio was not used just to define the outside dimensions of a building. You would see it in the height of columns versus two column widths, etc. The proportions I have given above are for one box in the proper ratio with two boxes stacked side by side on top of it. If you sketch this out, you'll see it will be a reasonable set of proportions.
But bottom line -- fit the table to the space and it's intended use. You'll curse phi if you can't see the alarm clock...
Steve,
I'm currently building a pair of night stands using a slightly modified contemporary Stickley design. The top is 27 x 17 with a 2" overhang, sides and front. The height is 27". The legs taper from the top straight down from 2" to 1-3/8. I may yet modify the design to 18" depth on the top: need to hurry with that decisions since I gluing up the slab sides and legs this morning. I built a pair of prairie-style lamps and the bases are 9" square with a 19" square stained glass shades and I may need more balance between the top and lamps. One point on table height, a lot depends of the bed since many new pillow-top beds make traditional night stands useless.
Edited 7/10/2005 10:04 am ET by Doug
Doug, do you have a drawing/photo you can share? Those dimensions are close to a pair I'm noodling around with ...Thanks,
Clay
No drawings other than simple shop sketch by I've got some material I'll scan in.
Okay, found the pic in their catelog: http://www.stickley.com/gallery/details.cfm?id=5319&c=36&cat1=89&cat2=224
PERFECT.. Will hold at lest two glasses of Jack (for me) AND her wine glasses!
Here is my design. Its Shaker, but proportions are proportions.
Steve, have you measured the height of the bed to see what would be an ideal height for the tables? My nightstands are 25" high, but I also have a very low bed. For the top, I think 18" X 18" would work well, and you could make the legs and slats just a little bit lighter.
I've just started using Solidworks to draw furniture and it's great to be able to view a piece from all angles.
Andrew
First off, thanks to everyone for their advice/comments...much appreciated.
I should mention that I am somewhat limited in my options at this point with some dimensions as I have already rough cut the legs to 25 3/4" and the table tops have been glued up to 16 1/2" square. At this point I can still change apron size, drawer dimensions, leg size, slat size, and other minor tweaks.
Stephen: It sounds like I am in a similar situation, as the golden ratio is too restrictive for the functionality. Though I will try to implement where possible.
Paul: I believe 1 1/2" legs may be my best bet here, though I am reluctant to taper them. I recently made a small Shaker table with nice splayed tapered legs, it came out nice, however this time I intend to go with the Arts and Crafts style straight legs. I like your comments about using phi for the space below the apron, I'll see if I can make it work.
Doug: I agree with you regarding the table height vs. bed height. We have a somewhat low bed as well and have been using temporary nightstands (wooden collapsible TV dinner stands.......ugh). The temp stands are 25" tall and are just about perfect height-wise, I could vary it slightly for esthetics but would not make any big changes.
Will: two for you, one for her eh?.....sounds like a plan to me
DM: thanks for the plan, I'll be reviewing it
Andrew: 25" high is about right for my bed height as well. I have remodeled the nightstand with 1 1/2" legs, the slats are still 3/4" though (pic attached). What do you think? Your using solidworks to eh?....it's pretty powerful software, have you had any luck importing custom wood colors to "paint" on your projects?
Thanks again,
Steve
I would make the slats 3/8" by 3/4", I think that is a typical slat dimension in arts and crafts design.
R13
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled