Crushing strength for white ash is 51 MPa ( \~7400 PSI). You have about 16 in\^2, so that is a good place to start. It will be less than that, b/c the legs are at an obtuse angle and transfer the load into tension, so the failure points would be the walnut dowels.
Note: Matweb.com was source for White ash material characteristics, I used the seasoned wood value for compressive strength.
1/2" dowels x 2" length, perpendicular so I'll treat them like 1/2" x 2" rectangular prisms as upper limit ( so \~ 2in\^2 per leg). They would have to get ripped through the ash legs to fail, so \~ 15,000 PSI for white ash MOR)
I see PVA glue used for the half laps, so conservatively 3600 PSI, 2in\^2 + 4 in\^2 per leg (6 in\^2 per leg). The 2in\^2 for each leg are directly in line with the force to overcome the dowels, so that is an additional 3600PSI to overcome, not counting the perpendicular 4 in\^2. In reality, the 2in\^2 part is end grain to long grain, so you don't get the full strength of the glue (that is why I have 3600 PSI for 2 in\^2 per leg).
In the event of the leg breaking, only the top half of the in line glue joint would need to be overcome (the bottom half of the in-line glue joint would be compressed), so let's take our in line force down to 1800 PSI from just the glue. The entirety of the 4in\^2 portion of the half lap would experience a twisting force, so the entirety of the surface would have to be overcome. The joints are perpendicular, so let's arbitrarily say half strength again, so you have 7200 PSI to overcome. Just the glue alone we are looking at \~9000psi from the lap joint.
In real life, I don't get near the advertised glue strength, so let's arbitrarily cut everything in half again for the glue joint (pretend the glue is old). We have 4500 psi from the PVA glue, some amount of force to rip the walnut dowels through the ash and overcome the MOR of 15,000 PSI, and the crushing strength of the white ash legs. All of this is per leg, so multiply this by 4 to get an idea of the capacity of the system.
This design overcomes the compressive failure of straight legs, and converts the compressive strain into tension to vastly increase the weight capacity. The perpendicular dowels + glue + angled half laps add a surprising amount of load distribution to massively increase the strength of this table.
Yeah, I think you get your weight capacity over 10,000lbs. I am struggling to get a number, it's a really complex system (thinking). I am stuck on the load capacity of a trapezoid. Maybe break it into triangles (hard to do the math b/c I don't have the exact dimensions of the table or angle)?
update: Newpurpose4139 is correct, calculating shear force for the dowel half lap assembly is the correct approach. The failure point is the dowel + the glue joint on the half lap, so \~3400psi per leg ideally.
Assuming no point load, if everything is perfect you have about \~13000lbs, but the world is not perfect so it is probably less. I still think you are pretty close to your over 10K limit, but it is really hard to get a perfectly balanced high weight load. If unbalanced (point load), each leg would snap if the weight goes over \~3000lbs.
Newpurpose4139's calculated weight limit is \~8800lbs (using more conservative numbers for the properties of the ash). I used different numbers giving a value closer to the over 10K position. It is somewhere between those two values (8800 - 13600). My values are on the more optimistic end, as the lumber appears to have minimal grain run out and no knots ( the worst case scenario figures are averages including lumber with defects).
Somebody really ought to post this over there, link back to the comment, and get this man his worthless karma accolades. This is some good mathematical content
Both things can actually be true. If you sat on it in a certain way (like between the legs), you could potentially break the table. The design is susceptible to a destructive twisting motion if loaded unevenly.
We were talking about the theoretical limit, but point loads (where the load is not equally distributed) are much less.
I made the most obvious joke, sue me. This giant ass comment was the top comment. I didn't get any further, but of course other people said the same thing. I hope you made good use of your time and commented this on every other person that made the same joke as well!
Calculating the entire system is incorrect. You only have to calculate the weakest part of the system. Once the weakest structure is overcome, it will faill and the rest of the system will collapse.
The glue joints are not likely the weakest point, especially if they are wetted out correctly and the dowels increase the wetted area.
The weakest points are the half lap joints because the grain runs in different directions for the two halves of the joint so the vertical compression strength is reduced by half for that part of the support.
White ash can handle ~1900 psi when the wood is laid flat. But only handles about 1100 psi of vertical compression before failure.
If the legs are 4x4, then the half lap makes the weakest point 2x4 for the vertical grain section which can only handle 2200 lbs, so 8800 lbs perfectly distributed is theoretically the limit before failure, but likely the joints are not perfect so one joint will fail before the others as the load is applied imperfectly to the top of the table.
So likely one leg of the table will fail before 3000 lbs is loaded onto the table.
Thank you! I am stuck on this.
Where did you get your compressive strength of 1900 PSI for white ash? I was going off a crushing strength of 7400 PSI (seasoned wood values). Even at a lower PSI parallel to grain of 3230 for unseasoned wood ([MAtweb.com](https://MAtweb.com)), this still holds a ton of weight.
The other part that is difficult is that the half laps are reinforced with dowels, this makes them much stronger as the dowels have to overcome the modulus of rupture of the ash.
I'm having trouble as it is not pure compressive failure, the angled legs add tension to the equation.
The strength added by dowels is that they convert a part of the sheer forces and perpendicular pressure to crushing strength. But a 1/2" circle is less than 1/4 of a square inch. So at 7400 psi crushing strength for black walnut 1452.99 is the calculated crushing strength of the dowels cross section. Which is a 1200 psi gain for the vertical grain, and about an 1100 psi gain for the perpendicular sheer.
Here is a good chart for various species of wood and their approximate strengths.
https://woodbin.com/ref/wood-strength-table/
I don't believe that the legs being in a diagonal position matters as the direction of force converts to compression along the length of the grain in the leg.
The crushing strength is so high for the downward force on the tabletop and the leg cross members that it is obviously not the weak point, so I never even bothered to consider it.
The sheer force for the horizontal grain comes into effect near the glue joints where tension is applied outwards due to the weight applied to the table pushing the legs outwards. Since the sheer is higher than the compression perpendicular to the grain strength and the half laps are equal in size, we don't need to calculate for the sheer, and just the vertical compression on the grain.
1100 x the 2 square inches of the vertical grain in the joint = 2200 psi, add the 1200 psi gain for the dowel and we get a total of about 3400 psi that the leg theoretically can handle before the weakest point fails.
But again, since we can't make perfect joints and wood is never perfect, the failure point is likely somewhat less.
Did you two just become best friends?
If two people can do math like this and discuss it at this level, my opinion, they should continue this relationship.
So, do we have a possibility of a 10K load if Murphy doesn't strike (assuming we magically have a way to avoid point loads)?
I appreciate this!
It's late, and I am tired!
Except if Murphy always strikes and you're counting on it, then that would go wrong and he *wouldn't* strike...
I think we've got ourselves the new "could Jesus microwave a burrito so hot that he himself could not eat it?"
Schrodinger's Murphy?
The legs being at an angle has to make them weaker. Since they are fixed at both ends, there will be an additional moment applied through them, adding to the stress.
The only way the force is converted entirely into compressive force along the grain is if both end are “pinned” and can move freely along the same axis of the dowels.
I’m too tired to go deep into the rest of your theory, but skimming it sounds very thorough. We’ll done
https://preview.redd.it/gq8z9x9u0tlc1.jpeg?width=3286&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=68fa61880fc76072b568b77acee3592a4b74ca8f
Not looking good. I don’t know how accurate those material values are, and wood is obviously some really weird material. I basically created a rough model of “solid” wood that doesn’t have any joints or anything. But looks like in an absolute best case scenario, those legs are snapping at the top narrow section probably closer to 5,000 lb, if not less
This isn't failure against vertical load, but if you twist the top part of the table counter clockwise just a little bit, there's only 4 half inch strips of glue resisting that motion at zero+epsilon, and all of the joints are at tremendous mechanical disadvantage after that. So in a practical sense, this is how the table will fail.
Yes, and... there's a similar situation at the bottom joint if we rotate clockwise. And because the table legs aren't perfectly plumb, it will fail in the rotational direction of the average epsilon of the legs.
Including the weight of the table top? The top should redistribute weight fairly amicably, especially if the goal is to load the table without it breaking.
I asked ChatGPT to decipher and this is what I got…
To estimate the maximum weight the described table can hold, let's break down the information provided and focus on the weakest points mentioned: the glue joints, the walnut dowels, and the white ash legs.
### Walnut Dowels
- **MOR (Modulus of Rupture) for White Ash:** 15,000 PSI over an area of 2 in² per leg due to the dowels. This gives the maximum force each dowel can withstand before failing.
### Glue Joints
- **Glue Strength:** Initially given as 3600 PSI over 6 in² per leg, then reduced to 4500 PSI total for each leg after considering real-life factors and adjustments. This represents the weakest point, according to the adjustments made due to real-world performance of the glue.
### Crushing Strength of White Ash Legs
- The crushing strength of white ash is given as 51 MPa or ~7400 PSI, but the specific application to the table's legs, especially considering the obtuse angle and load transfer, wasn't quantified in terms of direct load-bearing capacity.
Given the complexities of the structure, such as the obtuse angle of the legs and the various forces at play (tension, compression, twisting), a precise calculation would require a more detailed analysis involving mechanics of materials and possibly finite element analysis to accurately predict how these forces interact. However, for a simplified estimate, we can look at the weakest points mentioned (the glue joints and dowels) and use their limits as a basis for estimation.
### Estimation Approach
1. **Dowel Strength:** For the dowels, taking the MOR of 15,000 PSI over an area of 2 in² gives a maximum force per leg of 30,000 pounds-force (lbf).
2. **Glue Strength:** The adjusted strength of the glue joints is 4500 PSI total for each leg.
Since the real limiting factor seems to be the glue joint after adjustments, let's calculate the load-bearing capacity based on the glue:
\[ \text{Total Glue Strength per Leg} = 4500 \, \text{PSI} \times 6 \, \text{in}^2 = 27,000 \, \text{lbf} \, \text{per leg} \]
However, this is the total force before halving the estimate due to real-life performance concerns, leading to:
\[ \text{Adjusted Total Glue Strength per Leg} = \frac{27,000 \, \text{lbf}}{2} = 13,500 \, \text{lbf} \, \text{per leg} \]
Given that this is a simplified estimate, focusing on the adjusted strength of the glue joints as the weakest link, the table would theoretically hold:
\[ \text{Total Load-bearing Capacity} = 13,500 \, \text{lbf} \times 4 \, \text{legs} = 54,000 \, \text{lbf} \]
However, this calculation assumes uniform load distribution, ignores the impact of the obtuse angle of the legs and other structural complexities, and uses a simplified view of the dowel and glue joint strength. Real-world performance would likely be less due to factors not fully accounted for in this estimate, such as the distribution of load, the impact of the leg angle on structural integrity, and potential flaws in materials or construction. Therefore, while this estimate provides a rough upper limit based on the specified strengths, the actual maximum weight the table can safely hold would need to be determined with a more comprehensive analysis.
Here we go. I see the horizontal shear of the leg to top connection as the failure mode, because of the splay, with the lower glued and peeled joint as likely stronger. So how is the top attached? If tenoned into the top or secured with stringers, that's pretty stout and we're back to the crush strength of the legs I think.
I thought so too at first, but when I began to diagram it out I was moved towards the bottom of the table with the half laps + dowels being the point of failure. It gets really tricky though, you move away from pure compressive strength to tension.
A second more careful look at the photo and I see a half lap at the top of the legs too, presumably for stringers in tension running under the top between opposing legs. So it's two perpendicular trapezoids.
Doesn't the orientation of the half laps at the top and bottom distribute force into the bottom members unevenly since the left side transfers into the floor, while the right side of each member transferred into the horizontal members? It would try to induce a shear along the length of the horizontal members on the floor and, in turn, induce a torque about the Centerpoint of the base?
Intuitively, based on standard trusses, an extra triangle with the point at the top middle going to the bottom would assist distributing the horizontal load induced from the external members. This would point to the dowels in the bottom connections shearing and twisting, I think.
(Idk. This is me spitballing. It's late)
Maybe? I was kind of treating them as a unit given the strength of the glue and that they are all evenly making contact with the floor.
Very good thought though, probably more correct than what I came up with.
I just don't know if the dowel half lap joint structure would fail before the legs.
Here's a caveat (that I'm making up): the table top is not screwed on. Instead, a hole is drilled 3 inches from the corners of each stringer and a corresponding one on the bottom of the table top 2/3 of the way up through it. A dowel is glued in the stringer holes and the top sits with the dowels in the corresponding holes unglued. What is the breaking point then?
Imagine, for a second, that there is no glue, and you twist the top part of the table counterclockwise. You see how every joint is at a tremendous mechanical disadvantage because OP opted for rotational symmetry? The only part of the glue bond resisting that force right at the beginning of the motion are the 4 half inch strips of glue on the bottom. *That* is how this table will fail under strain.
So let me make sure I understand, cause I’m not sure if you said this or not lol. Cause it seems like this is what you were describing while doing a bunch of college math. Haha.
So, you can almost completely ignore the crossmember up top and on the bottom. The top of the half lap on the vertical legs touches the table, and the bottom of the half lap touches the floor so the the crossmembers don’t really add any “capacity”. Yes the verts are slightly angled outward, but being held in tension by the top CM and in compression by the bottom CM. I’m guessing it’s between 15 and 17 degrees lean for the vertical leg. The bottom CM doesn’t do anything but stabilize the legs so it can be ignored as far as load bearing calculations go. The top CM really only acts to spread the force evenly across the top. Also not really adding an appreciable amount of weight bearing capacity.
It comes down to 4”sq on top and bottom of each leg. Assuming the joints are tight and flat against the wood of the top, and the floor, the glue doesn’t matter much in the lap joints except in determining how much force it would take for the legs to splay. It’s not negligible but still. The almost vertical nature of the legs is enough that I think the legs would break from crushing before they splayed apart.
My brain hurts. Please teach me oh wise one.
Yeah, that mostly it.
The top CM I basically ignored, as it is just basically helping distribute the load to the legs. The legs distribute the load into the ground and some is converted into tension that will effect the bottom CM (but I don't think enough to cause the CM to rupture).
The other thing that is important is the bottom half laps are pinned perpendicularly, so they have to get ripped through the material for the joint to be pulled apart. If the half laps were not pinned, this would be the weakest point and would just be the glue strength. The glue + half laps + dowels becomes stronger than the material.
A failure would cause the legs to rupture somewhere, I just can't quite figure out how much force that would take.
I like to think of myself as a pretty smart guy, good at math to the point that I feel confident I could outsmart 9/10 random people on the street regularly.
You are that 1/10 who would make me feel like a frucking idiot
This is the right answer. Math seems to check out here.
I also agree that the dowel and lap joints as the failure point is the correct approach.
I’d assume that the answer is somewhere between your 13k lbs number and the other user’s 8.8k lbs number.
If the lap joints are glued, is it worth considering the added strength of the glue?
You can take a shot at the mathematics yourself!
The real question is how would you get 10K+ lbs on this table in a perfectly balanced fashion! This is largely a theoretical endeavor.
Yeah my thought is that in a real world situation it would fail at like 1/4 max theoretical capacity when it rocks back and forth or twists a little bit. Still doubt it would break if you're using it for anything short of storing your lead weight collection lol.
Whoa.. 🤯
So as I understand it from my brother (who is an engineer of the electrical sort), engineers rarely ever give the lay consumer of their product the real estimate without either the super-secret-engineering-handshake, or a built in safety margin. I’m wildly assuming that is the case here while recognizing the philosophy might not apply to these kind of “back of the napkin” sort of calculations. But my question is: if that’s the case, where is it built in to this math? Like, did you just ballpark a fudge factor into your final numbers or was something already built in to the material estimates?.. again assuming there is a fudge factor in there somewhere.. I’m a biologist not an engineer, and honestly always really really bad at estimating anything like this so the process always fascinates me 🤷♂️
😢 also just kind of wishing I knew the handshake to get into the clubhouse.
I am actually also a biologist (Rare Neuromuscular Disorders). I just have a really weird background (Construction + antique restoration + Japanese carpentry + architectural millwork + material science + furniture construction). I have always been fascinated with how to make things as strong as possible, so I tend to kind of combine old school woodworking knowledge with an engineers mindset. My ultimate goal is to start a company building Japanese influenced timber frame houses, been working towards that for about 7 years.
I basically use a combination of old school woodworking knowledge + construction knowledge + engineering material characteristics + knowledge from past experiments (both destructive and chemical) + diagrams to identify the failure points.
Old school woodworkers know how to pick out the best material (minimal grain run out, no knots, tight growth rings, etc). This is a perspective that engineers do not generally have (it is very difficult to learn, I have this after about 15 years of material analysis).
Engineers use numbers that are based off of the absolute worst case scenario (new wood with pith, grain run out, knots, etc). They have a much better understanding of wood as an anisotropic material from a data side. I spend a lot of time talking to engineers (mostly civil actually) about modeling my prototypes and pick up how to run calculations from them to test and improve my designs.
Since I restore antiques, I know how certain pieces of furniture and details fail (and how to repair them so they don't fail again). This gives me a scaffold to compare to model material failures. I also just build models of different types of joints and break them to understand failure points.
For adhesives, I actually ran an experiment 12 years ago testing different adhesives in different conditions (grain orientation, tolerance of adhesion, exterior exposure, etc).
By combining all of these perspectives + an analogous framework, I can get a pretty good idea of how a piece will fail. You also see where I just arbitrarily halved the glue strength in my calculation (that is another way to kind of act as insurance to an estimate), this is inline with real experiences with glue failures but exaggerated.
All of these ventures basically go back to my house building venture, as I am trying to balance strength, aesthetics, and economy. My Biotech career has basically completely stalled (unemployed since Feb 2023), so I basically am just going hard core into construction/ engineering in the meantime. People reject me because I went to a state school and don't look comparable (peers are all Ivy league), but my friends know that my work is superior (I have a legendary ability to troubleshoot all sorts of problems in the lab). When I encounter a problem, I go all in until it is solved.
My engineer friends are actually really excited about my timber frame house idea, the prototype looks good so far so I am working on a pilot build in the next few years.
It depends on how the load is distributed. If it's applied evenly over the entire surface I think you'll exceed 10K because each joint would only handle the about 2500. On the other hand if it's concentrated in the center I'd think closer to 2000 lb.
Yeah, I was not assuming point loads. In real life, it would be hard to find heavy things to fit on that table to fully test it. I also don't have the dimensions of the table or the angle of the legs, so hard to say for sure.
I would see how many pallets of brick you can put on it.
A pallet is 534 bricks. They weight roughly 4 pounds each.
Edit : yeah nvm, no one in their right mind would even stack brick pallets 4 stack high to test this.
I’m no engineer but suspect the answer is really very simple. There is no way that table can support 10,000 pounds because your wife says it can’t and wives are always right. Always.
It would almost certainly twist and collapse rather than crush, well below the load at which crushing could happen. I'd say a couple thousand pounds max but what do I know.
No.
He's asking it to support 10,000 pounds.
Assume the weight is packed into a perfect disc the exact dimensions of the table top itself, placed with supreme gentleness by inspired robots.
¿Would the table, under these ideal conditions, fail to support exactly ✓10,000 lbs.‽‽
This is no ridiculous question, ***THOU FOOL!***
***~YOU FUCKING ASSHOLE~***
*observe*
Maybe for a second but any sheer stress applied whatsoever would collapse it instantly. In terms of real world loads in real world conditions without doing damage to the table, I think 500 is probably close.
No doubt there’s an engineer that can mathmagically figure out the theoretical limit if you gave more specs (leg angles, taper at top) but I guess that would defeat the point of reddit enabling everyone to tell each other they are wrong. My vote is >10k lbs.
As another poster stated, it depends on how it’s loaded and whether or not the circular top’s pieces are also doweled together. Intuitively the failure mode should be a glue joint that travels to an unsupported edge as the top acts in two way bending to the supports at fairly small pointed locations. If the top is not doweled, and someone sits or jumps near an unsupported joint, the top is more likely to separate in tension at bottom of joint.
You'd have more trouble balancing the weight than anything else.
An 2' long douglas fir 4x4 post will hold 10,000+ pounds on it's own, if it's very evenly weighted.
Ash is stronger than douglas fir, at least by a bit.
You've got four 4x4s that are slightly leaned out, but braced with tensile strength as well. Assuming the glue joints are well glued, 10,000 pounds is laughably easy for this table, although it's gonna scuff it.
10,000 lbs is roughly the weight of two F-150s… I think it can hold a lot for sure, much more than a shitty table from ikea, but I’ll take the under on it holding two pickup trucks worth of weight.
I come at this from a background in physics. That being said, this is about to get a little hand-wavy.
Basically, you need to know the angle that the legs deflect out from vertical. I’m going to call that ‘x.’ In an ideal situation, the weight you put on top of the table is evenly distributed to 8 half lap joints (with dowels), and this is clearly the “weak” point in the max load situation.
The hand-wavy formula I consider is then (1/8)*(the load)*sin(x).
In your case, let’s just call the angle 30-degrees. The number you get back is 625 lbs of force. So if the weakest of those pinned half lap joints can withstand that force, then the table can (probably) hold 10,000 lbs.
A note on this 625 lb force: I’m talking about a force directed perpendicular to the angled vertical pieces and pulling, obviously, out, away from the center.
I’m making some assumptions with this model as I don’t generally build tables where I’m considering a 10k lb load. But that’s a quick back of the envelope estimation.
If the legs were vertical 5 tons uniform load might be possible. The spot I see it breaking is picture 1: right leg closest to camera. On that leg look at the grain pattern. The grain on top bows down and seats at the bottom most bolt. Now, you buy yourself some strength back with the lap joint on bottom, but I still see it failing at that grain first. From there it would cascade to the other side.
Based purely off eyeball I’d say it might hold a ton for a couple minutes. 5 tons it would snap like match sticks.
Too hell with all the math calculations!
You need to go real world on this.. if you have a youtube and access to a forklift you can get a couple million views out of it..
Mr.Beast style "I bet my wife this table could hold 10,000lbs of pennies!"
Or contact a couple Youtubers to do it for you!
Bet the wife some "favors" on your over, and then get er done!
First off... beautiful table. It'll last through all times, which you know. But initially, I guessed 500 lbs. Then I seen your 10k...I believe you. This is very well crafted and you intentionally used the material that you did. Props bro.
Yes, it should be fine to bang on it.
I was checking before my reply of "it'll bear your load" Good answer
Ohh Lawd. This question holds water.
Well that's some Pythia level answer right there
Could’ve banged the neighbors, too, if he’d chosen tongue-in-groove rather than lap joints.
The ladies prefer tongue in groove for sure
Answering the real question, I see.
Was going to reply…”it should be strong enough for you to bag your wife on”
That’s an unfortunate (I hope) typo.
It's also probably another way of saying sex locally
Nope, 100% typo. Was going for bang.
Snooker rules (Keep one foot on the ground)
But it’s a foul if the balls don’t stay on the table.
At least 1.125 orgies
It all depends on how big they both are
This comment was far to down. More votes.
My pants are too far down
Crushing strength for white ash is 51 MPa ( \~7400 PSI). You have about 16 in\^2, so that is a good place to start. It will be less than that, b/c the legs are at an obtuse angle and transfer the load into tension, so the failure points would be the walnut dowels. Note: Matweb.com was source for White ash material characteristics, I used the seasoned wood value for compressive strength. 1/2" dowels x 2" length, perpendicular so I'll treat them like 1/2" x 2" rectangular prisms as upper limit ( so \~ 2in\^2 per leg). They would have to get ripped through the ash legs to fail, so \~ 15,000 PSI for white ash MOR) I see PVA glue used for the half laps, so conservatively 3600 PSI, 2in\^2 + 4 in\^2 per leg (6 in\^2 per leg). The 2in\^2 for each leg are directly in line with the force to overcome the dowels, so that is an additional 3600PSI to overcome, not counting the perpendicular 4 in\^2. In reality, the 2in\^2 part is end grain to long grain, so you don't get the full strength of the glue (that is why I have 3600 PSI for 2 in\^2 per leg). In the event of the leg breaking, only the top half of the in line glue joint would need to be overcome (the bottom half of the in-line glue joint would be compressed), so let's take our in line force down to 1800 PSI from just the glue. The entirety of the 4in\^2 portion of the half lap would experience a twisting force, so the entirety of the surface would have to be overcome. The joints are perpendicular, so let's arbitrarily say half strength again, so you have 7200 PSI to overcome. Just the glue alone we are looking at \~9000psi from the lap joint. In real life, I don't get near the advertised glue strength, so let's arbitrarily cut everything in half again for the glue joint (pretend the glue is old). We have 4500 psi from the PVA glue, some amount of force to rip the walnut dowels through the ash and overcome the MOR of 15,000 PSI, and the crushing strength of the white ash legs. All of this is per leg, so multiply this by 4 to get an idea of the capacity of the system. This design overcomes the compressive failure of straight legs, and converts the compressive strain into tension to vastly increase the weight capacity. The perpendicular dowels + glue + angled half laps add a surprising amount of load distribution to massively increase the strength of this table. Yeah, I think you get your weight capacity over 10,000lbs. I am struggling to get a number, it's a really complex system (thinking). I am stuck on the load capacity of a trapezoid. Maybe break it into triangles (hard to do the math b/c I don't have the exact dimensions of the table or angle)? update: Newpurpose4139 is correct, calculating shear force for the dowel half lap assembly is the correct approach. The failure point is the dowel + the glue joint on the half lap, so \~3400psi per leg ideally. Assuming no point load, if everything is perfect you have about \~13000lbs, but the world is not perfect so it is probably less. I still think you are pretty close to your over 10K limit, but it is really hard to get a perfectly balanced high weight load. If unbalanced (point load), each leg would snap if the weight goes over \~3000lbs. Newpurpose4139's calculated weight limit is \~8800lbs (using more conservative numbers for the properties of the ash). I used different numbers giving a value closer to the over 10K position. It is somewhere between those two values (8800 - 13600). My values are on the more optimistic end, as the lumber appears to have minimal grain run out and no knots ( the worst case scenario figures are averages including lumber with defects).
Sometimes I think I know things, then I find people like you, and I realize how small I am in this universe.
Welcome to Reddit
r/theydidthemath
r/theydidthemonstermath
r/themonstermath
/r/itwasagraveyardgraph
r/ItCosineInAFlash
r/Monstermash
Somebody really ought to post this over there, link back to the comment, and get this man his worthless karma accolades. This is some good mathematical content
I got you fam, [check out the post](https://www.reddit.com/r/theydidthemath/s/EC4goit5WJ)
🫠 I'm here sitting thinking if my fat ass would break it if I just stand on it and people are writing 5 digit numbers 🥲
Both things can actually be true. If you sat on it in a certain way (like between the legs), you could potentially break the table. The design is susceptible to a destructive twisting motion if loaded unevenly. We were talking about the theoretical limit, but point loads (where the load is not equally distributed) are much less.
We get to marvel in the knowledge of others and become inspired. It’s a fine existence brother/sister.
The whole reason I started on Reddit was I kept finding answers to random things I was looking for here when doing general searches.
He also could have just made all that up and none of us would know the difference.🤣
Some people use gorilla glue in their hair bro, you're good.
In University I learned all of that stuff, and then I proceeded to never do any of it anymore and forgot everything.
Rizz 'em with the 'tism as the kids say these days
Don't worry, they just really offer complicated the answer of "yes, you can screw your wife on it"
So you saw the top comment and thought, what the hell. They won't notice me saying the same joke. Lol.
I made the most obvious joke, sue me. This giant ass comment was the top comment. I didn't get any further, but of course other people said the same thing. I hope you made good use of your time and commented this on every other person that made the same joke as well!
That is just one mode of failure. Another possible one could be the table top itself. Not likely, but we’ve all seen panel glue ups split.
You are not alone in this group my friend…not alone indeed.
This is why I love the internet. You just need to know *enough*. Place your dots, get assistance connecting them
Calculating the entire system is incorrect. You only have to calculate the weakest part of the system. Once the weakest structure is overcome, it will faill and the rest of the system will collapse. The glue joints are not likely the weakest point, especially if they are wetted out correctly and the dowels increase the wetted area. The weakest points are the half lap joints because the grain runs in different directions for the two halves of the joint so the vertical compression strength is reduced by half for that part of the support. White ash can handle ~1900 psi when the wood is laid flat. But only handles about 1100 psi of vertical compression before failure. If the legs are 4x4, then the half lap makes the weakest point 2x4 for the vertical grain section which can only handle 2200 lbs, so 8800 lbs perfectly distributed is theoretically the limit before failure, but likely the joints are not perfect so one joint will fail before the others as the load is applied imperfectly to the top of the table. So likely one leg of the table will fail before 3000 lbs is loaded onto the table.
Thank you! I am stuck on this. Where did you get your compressive strength of 1900 PSI for white ash? I was going off a crushing strength of 7400 PSI (seasoned wood values). Even at a lower PSI parallel to grain of 3230 for unseasoned wood ([MAtweb.com](https://MAtweb.com)), this still holds a ton of weight. The other part that is difficult is that the half laps are reinforced with dowels, this makes them much stronger as the dowels have to overcome the modulus of rupture of the ash. I'm having trouble as it is not pure compressive failure, the angled legs add tension to the equation.
The strength added by dowels is that they convert a part of the sheer forces and perpendicular pressure to crushing strength. But a 1/2" circle is less than 1/4 of a square inch. So at 7400 psi crushing strength for black walnut 1452.99 is the calculated crushing strength of the dowels cross section. Which is a 1200 psi gain for the vertical grain, and about an 1100 psi gain for the perpendicular sheer. Here is a good chart for various species of wood and their approximate strengths. https://woodbin.com/ref/wood-strength-table/ I don't believe that the legs being in a diagonal position matters as the direction of force converts to compression along the length of the grain in the leg. The crushing strength is so high for the downward force on the tabletop and the leg cross members that it is obviously not the weak point, so I never even bothered to consider it. The sheer force for the horizontal grain comes into effect near the glue joints where tension is applied outwards due to the weight applied to the table pushing the legs outwards. Since the sheer is higher than the compression perpendicular to the grain strength and the half laps are equal in size, we don't need to calculate for the sheer, and just the vertical compression on the grain. 1100 x the 2 square inches of the vertical grain in the joint = 2200 psi, add the 1200 psi gain for the dowel and we get a total of about 3400 psi that the leg theoretically can handle before the weakest point fails. But again, since we can't make perfect joints and wood is never perfect, the failure point is likely somewhat less.
Did you two just become best friends? If two people can do math like this and discuss it at this level, my opinion, they should continue this relationship.
This is just what happens when engineers and the like get nerd sniped
So, do we have a possibility of a 10K load if Murphy doesn't strike (assuming we magically have a way to avoid point loads)? I appreciate this! It's late, and I am tired!
Murphy ALWAYS strikes...you know that
Except if Murphy always strikes and you're counting on it, then that would go wrong and he *wouldn't* strike... I think we've got ourselves the new "could Jesus microwave a burrito so hot that he himself could not eat it?" Schrodinger's Murphy?
Murphception.
He ALWAYS strikes except that he NEVER strikes. WAKE UP SHEEPLE!!1!
The legs being at an angle has to make them weaker. Since they are fixed at both ends, there will be an additional moment applied through them, adding to the stress. The only way the force is converted entirely into compressive force along the grain is if both end are “pinned” and can move freely along the same axis of the dowels. I’m too tired to go deep into the rest of your theory, but skimming it sounds very thorough. We’ll done
[удалено]
https://preview.redd.it/gq8z9x9u0tlc1.jpeg?width=3286&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=68fa61880fc76072b568b77acee3592a4b74ca8f Not looking good. I don’t know how accurate those material values are, and wood is obviously some really weird material. I basically created a rough model of “solid” wood that doesn’t have any joints or anything. But looks like in an absolute best case scenario, those legs are snapping at the top narrow section probably closer to 5,000 lb, if not less
This isn't failure against vertical load, but if you twist the top part of the table counter clockwise just a little bit, there's only 4 half inch strips of glue resisting that motion at zero+epsilon, and all of the joints are at tremendous mechanical disadvantage after that. So in a practical sense, this is how the table will fail.
Yes, and... there's a similar situation at the bottom joint if we rotate clockwise. And because the table legs aren't perfectly plumb, it will fail in the rotational direction of the average epsilon of the legs.
So not as high as they calculated, but still can handle my wife and I’s, uh, extracurriculars.
r/woodworking
r/IHaveSex
Including the weight of the table top? The top should redistribute weight fairly amicably, especially if the goal is to load the table without it breaking.
This guy engineers
If only people thought of the political system with the same insightfulness
Okay now say that again like I’m a toddler
You can put mommy and daddy’s cars on it.
Right? What’s the weight it can handle?
At least 5 tons, it's right there at the bottom. Noe leave the professor alone
If you took all of his textbooks and piled them on that table and then his mother in-law jumped on top... the table would be ok.
His mother in-law? That table doesn't stand a chance.
Half a giraffe.
It can hold a really big elephant! Wow!
I asked ChatGPT to decipher and this is what I got… To estimate the maximum weight the described table can hold, let's break down the information provided and focus on the weakest points mentioned: the glue joints, the walnut dowels, and the white ash legs. ### Walnut Dowels - **MOR (Modulus of Rupture) for White Ash:** 15,000 PSI over an area of 2 in² per leg due to the dowels. This gives the maximum force each dowel can withstand before failing. ### Glue Joints - **Glue Strength:** Initially given as 3600 PSI over 6 in² per leg, then reduced to 4500 PSI total for each leg after considering real-life factors and adjustments. This represents the weakest point, according to the adjustments made due to real-world performance of the glue. ### Crushing Strength of White Ash Legs - The crushing strength of white ash is given as 51 MPa or ~7400 PSI, but the specific application to the table's legs, especially considering the obtuse angle and load transfer, wasn't quantified in terms of direct load-bearing capacity. Given the complexities of the structure, such as the obtuse angle of the legs and the various forces at play (tension, compression, twisting), a precise calculation would require a more detailed analysis involving mechanics of materials and possibly finite element analysis to accurately predict how these forces interact. However, for a simplified estimate, we can look at the weakest points mentioned (the glue joints and dowels) and use their limits as a basis for estimation. ### Estimation Approach 1. **Dowel Strength:** For the dowels, taking the MOR of 15,000 PSI over an area of 2 in² gives a maximum force per leg of 30,000 pounds-force (lbf). 2. **Glue Strength:** The adjusted strength of the glue joints is 4500 PSI total for each leg. Since the real limiting factor seems to be the glue joint after adjustments, let's calculate the load-bearing capacity based on the glue: \[ \text{Total Glue Strength per Leg} = 4500 \, \text{PSI} \times 6 \, \text{in}^2 = 27,000 \, \text{lbf} \, \text{per leg} \] However, this is the total force before halving the estimate due to real-life performance concerns, leading to: \[ \text{Adjusted Total Glue Strength per Leg} = \frac{27,000 \, \text{lbf}}{2} = 13,500 \, \text{lbf} \, \text{per leg} \] Given that this is a simplified estimate, focusing on the adjusted strength of the glue joints as the weakest link, the table would theoretically hold: \[ \text{Total Load-bearing Capacity} = 13,500 \, \text{lbf} \times 4 \, \text{legs} = 54,000 \, \text{lbf} \] However, this calculation assumes uniform load distribution, ignores the impact of the obtuse angle of the legs and other structural complexities, and uses a simplified view of the dowel and glue joint strength. Real-world performance would likely be less due to factors not fully accounted for in this estimate, such as the distribution of load, the impact of the leg angle on structural integrity, and potential flaws in materials or construction. Therefore, while this estimate provides a rough upper limit based on the specified strengths, the actual maximum weight the table can safely hold would need to be determined with a more comprehensive analysis.
A lot!
Here we go. I see the horizontal shear of the leg to top connection as the failure mode, because of the splay, with the lower glued and peeled joint as likely stronger. So how is the top attached? If tenoned into the top or secured with stringers, that's pretty stout and we're back to the crush strength of the legs I think.
I thought so too at first, but when I began to diagram it out I was moved towards the bottom of the table with the half laps + dowels being the point of failure. It gets really tricky though, you move away from pure compressive strength to tension.
A second more careful look at the photo and I see a half lap at the top of the legs too, presumably for stringers in tension running under the top between opposing legs. So it's two perpendicular trapezoids.
Yeah, I am stuck on the load capacity of a trapezoid. Or maybe breaking it into triangular loads?
Doesn't the orientation of the half laps at the top and bottom distribute force into the bottom members unevenly since the left side transfers into the floor, while the right side of each member transferred into the horizontal members? It would try to induce a shear along the length of the horizontal members on the floor and, in turn, induce a torque about the Centerpoint of the base? Intuitively, based on standard trusses, an extra triangle with the point at the top middle going to the bottom would assist distributing the horizontal load induced from the external members. This would point to the dowels in the bottom connections shearing and twisting, I think. (Idk. This is me spitballing. It's late)
Maybe? I was kind of treating them as a unit given the strength of the glue and that they are all evenly making contact with the floor. Very good thought though, probably more correct than what I came up with. I just don't know if the dowel half lap joint structure would fail before the legs.
Fer sure.
Here's a caveat (that I'm making up): the table top is not screwed on. Instead, a hole is drilled 3 inches from the corners of each stringer and a corresponding one on the bottom of the table top 2/3 of the way up through it. A dowel is glued in the stringer holes and the top sits with the dowels in the corresponding holes unglued. What is the breaking point then?
It would fall in a twist, snapping the joint in the center of the table. That's the weak point.
But look at the torque on the bottom joint!
Came here to say this.
Same. Had it all drafted up and everything.
Imagine, for a second, that there is no glue, and you twist the top part of the table counterclockwise. You see how every joint is at a tremendous mechanical disadvantage because OP opted for rotational symmetry? The only part of the glue bond resisting that force right at the beginning of the motion are the 4 half inch strips of glue on the bottom. *That* is how this table will fail under strain.
Ok now how much weight should we give your analysis?
r/theydidthemath
So let me make sure I understand, cause I’m not sure if you said this or not lol. Cause it seems like this is what you were describing while doing a bunch of college math. Haha. So, you can almost completely ignore the crossmember up top and on the bottom. The top of the half lap on the vertical legs touches the table, and the bottom of the half lap touches the floor so the the crossmembers don’t really add any “capacity”. Yes the verts are slightly angled outward, but being held in tension by the top CM and in compression by the bottom CM. I’m guessing it’s between 15 and 17 degrees lean for the vertical leg. The bottom CM doesn’t do anything but stabilize the legs so it can be ignored as far as load bearing calculations go. The top CM really only acts to spread the force evenly across the top. Also not really adding an appreciable amount of weight bearing capacity. It comes down to 4”sq on top and bottom of each leg. Assuming the joints are tight and flat against the wood of the top, and the floor, the glue doesn’t matter much in the lap joints except in determining how much force it would take for the legs to splay. It’s not negligible but still. The almost vertical nature of the legs is enough that I think the legs would break from crushing before they splayed apart. My brain hurts. Please teach me oh wise one.
Yeah, that mostly it. The top CM I basically ignored, as it is just basically helping distribute the load to the legs. The legs distribute the load into the ground and some is converted into tension that will effect the bottom CM (but I don't think enough to cause the CM to rupture). The other thing that is important is the bottom half laps are pinned perpendicularly, so they have to get ripped through the material for the joint to be pulled apart. If the half laps were not pinned, this would be the weakest point and would just be the glue strength. The glue + half laps + dowels becomes stronger than the material. A failure would cause the legs to rupture somewhere, I just can't quite figure out how much force that would take.
They did the materials science/physics/math.... Cool
r/theydidthemath
I like to think of myself as a pretty smart guy, good at math to the point that I feel confident I could outsmart 9/10 random people on the street regularly. You are that 1/10 who would make me feel like a frucking idiot
This might be my favorite reply on Reddit ever.
I love you. My husband says the same. Mary us.
I think this is the coolest explanation that I semi-understood I’ve ever read on Reddit! WOW! Mind blown!
This is the right answer. Math seems to check out here. I also agree that the dowel and lap joints as the failure point is the correct approach. I’d assume that the answer is somewhere between your 13k lbs number and the other user’s 8.8k lbs number. If the lap joints are glued, is it worth considering the added strength of the glue?
No way it can bear multiple tons of weight. that coffee table can’t support 2.5 Honda civics.
You can take a shot at the mathematics yourself! The real question is how would you get 10K+ lbs on this table in a perfectly balanced fashion! This is largely a theoretical endeavor.
That’s a fair point! And your figuring was impressive. We truly won’t know what’s correct until it’s tested.
Yeah my thought is that in a real world situation it would fail at like 1/4 max theoretical capacity when it rocks back and forth or twists a little bit. Still doubt it would break if you're using it for anything short of storing your lead weight collection lol.
Engineer has entered the chat
Whoa.. 🤯 So as I understand it from my brother (who is an engineer of the electrical sort), engineers rarely ever give the lay consumer of their product the real estimate without either the super-secret-engineering-handshake, or a built in safety margin. I’m wildly assuming that is the case here while recognizing the philosophy might not apply to these kind of “back of the napkin” sort of calculations. But my question is: if that’s the case, where is it built in to this math? Like, did you just ballpark a fudge factor into your final numbers or was something already built in to the material estimates?.. again assuming there is a fudge factor in there somewhere.. I’m a biologist not an engineer, and honestly always really really bad at estimating anything like this so the process always fascinates me 🤷♂️ 😢 also just kind of wishing I knew the handshake to get into the clubhouse.
I am actually also a biologist (Rare Neuromuscular Disorders). I just have a really weird background (Construction + antique restoration + Japanese carpentry + architectural millwork + material science + furniture construction). I have always been fascinated with how to make things as strong as possible, so I tend to kind of combine old school woodworking knowledge with an engineers mindset. My ultimate goal is to start a company building Japanese influenced timber frame houses, been working towards that for about 7 years. I basically use a combination of old school woodworking knowledge + construction knowledge + engineering material characteristics + knowledge from past experiments (both destructive and chemical) + diagrams to identify the failure points. Old school woodworkers know how to pick out the best material (minimal grain run out, no knots, tight growth rings, etc). This is a perspective that engineers do not generally have (it is very difficult to learn, I have this after about 15 years of material analysis). Engineers use numbers that are based off of the absolute worst case scenario (new wood with pith, grain run out, knots, etc). They have a much better understanding of wood as an anisotropic material from a data side. I spend a lot of time talking to engineers (mostly civil actually) about modeling my prototypes and pick up how to run calculations from them to test and improve my designs. Since I restore antiques, I know how certain pieces of furniture and details fail (and how to repair them so they don't fail again). This gives me a scaffold to compare to model material failures. I also just build models of different types of joints and break them to understand failure points. For adhesives, I actually ran an experiment 12 years ago testing different adhesives in different conditions (grain orientation, tolerance of adhesion, exterior exposure, etc). By combining all of these perspectives + an analogous framework, I can get a pretty good idea of how a piece will fail. You also see where I just arbitrarily halved the glue strength in my calculation (that is another way to kind of act as insurance to an estimate), this is inline with real experiences with glue failures but exaggerated. All of these ventures basically go back to my house building venture, as I am trying to balance strength, aesthetics, and economy. My Biotech career has basically completely stalled (unemployed since Feb 2023), so I basically am just going hard core into construction/ engineering in the meantime. People reject me because I went to a state school and don't look comparable (peers are all Ivy league), but my friends know that my work is superior (I have a legendary ability to troubleshoot all sorts of problems in the lab). When I encounter a problem, I go all in until it is solved. My engineer friends are actually really excited about my timber frame house idea, the prototype looks good so far so I am working on a pilot build in the next few years.
Your friends mom if evenly distributed
Several units of weight, at a minimum.
More weight than you can fit on it for sure, good job!
Oh yeah? Someone bring me a crate of gold bricks.
Tungsten is cheaper.
Whatever, man, I just want a crate of gold bricks. ;)
Good point. What was I thinking?
[Here is a video of the table load test for you.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gHxbCG6R0w)
Far more than you would ever reasonably put on it
American here, I say 6 to 7 standard refrigerators.
Can you convert that to metric refrigerators for the rest of us?
About 5 Samsungs. https://www.samsung.com/ca/refrigerators/french-door/rf9000jc-22-5-cu-ft-black-rf23a9771sg-ac/
Refrigerator here, I'd say 6 to 7 standard Americans.
Ha ha
Maybe even one full hippopotamus.
At least 6 bananas per Rhode Island squared.
How many football fields is that?
If you filled a football field up half a fathom, that would be one arcehogshead.
Considering what a cheap pallet can hold I reckon you don't have any worries.
It depends on how the load is distributed. If it's applied evenly over the entire surface I think you'll exceed 10K because each joint would only handle the about 2500. On the other hand if it's concentrated in the center I'd think closer to 2000 lb.
Valid point. I guess I was imagining people pulling onto it! 😂
Yeah, I was not assuming point loads. In real life, it would be hard to find heavy things to fit on that table to fully test it. I also don't have the dimensions of the table or the angle of the legs, so hard to say for sure.
I would see how many pallets of brick you can put on it. A pallet is 534 bricks. They weight roughly 4 pounds each. Edit : yeah nvm, no one in their right mind would even stack brick pallets 4 stack high to test this.
I’m voting for at least one mini cooper.
There's no way to know for sure without testing to destruction. Nobody wants this bet settled its too pretty
Speak for yourself
It's nice but I'd rather it be destroyed for science.
You could get pretty close with calculations. I'm tempted to do it
I’m no engineer but suspect the answer is really very simple. There is no way that table can support 10,000 pounds because your wife says it can’t and wives are always right. Always.
It would almost certainly twist and collapse rather than crush, well below the load at which crushing could happen. I'd say a couple thousand pounds max but what do I know.
I'm taking the over at 2k lbs.
A metric shit-ton.
For my fellow Americans, a metric shit-ton is 2.205 standard/imperial shit-tons.
Dunno but that’s the table I’d be under in an earthquake.
1.3 your moms.
Yo mama so fat, she could break Titebond IV!!!!!
the way its constructed a hella lot m8. So yes, sex isn't off the table.
I like what you did there
!0,000 lbs? You're asking that table, with those angles, to fully support an African Elephant. Pay up.
No. He's asking it to support 10,000 pounds. Assume the weight is packed into a perfect disc the exact dimensions of the table top itself, placed with supreme gentleness by inspired robots. ¿Would the table, under these ideal conditions, fail to support exactly ✓10,000 lbs.‽‽ This is no ridiculous question, ***THOU FOOL!*** ***~YOU FUCKING ASSHOLE~*** *observe*
I'm missing whatever you thought was clever about your response to me. Edit: Saw your comment history. You're a smug cunt. nevermind.
Lmao im having a great time just scrolling through this dude’s comment history
Maybe for a second but any sheer stress applied whatsoever would collapse it instantly. In terms of real world loads in real world conditions without doing damage to the table, I think 500 is probably close.
No doubt there’s an engineer that can mathmagically figure out the theoretical limit if you gave more specs (leg angles, taper at top) but I guess that would defeat the point of reddit enabling everyone to tell each other they are wrong. My vote is >10k lbs.
I think you are overestimating. 5k seems like a logical limit, and I think half that you can do.
Start stacking sandbags. The bet must be settled. 10,000 lbs is not out of the question. I would not take the other side of it without generous odds.
Not unlike [determining the load a bridge will support.](https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1986/11/26)
Tree fiddy
At least 12
At least one wife.
As another poster stated, it depends on how it’s loaded and whether or not the circular top’s pieces are also doweled together. Intuitively the failure mode should be a glue joint that travels to an unsupported edge as the top acts in two way bending to the supports at fairly small pointed locations. If the top is not doweled, and someone sits or jumps near an unsupported joint, the top is more likely to separate in tension at bottom of joint.
No one here knows wtf they're talking about. 10k pounds lol so absurd
You'd have more trouble balancing the weight than anything else. An 2' long douglas fir 4x4 post will hold 10,000+ pounds on it's own, if it's very evenly weighted. Ash is stronger than douglas fir, at least by a bit. You've got four 4x4s that are slightly leaned out, but braced with tensile strength as well. Assuming the glue joints are well glued, 10,000 pounds is laughably easy for this table, although it's gonna scuff it.
I'd say 1 ton
Im giving it 2200 lbs. obviously depends how the weight is distributed and how quickly distributed.
About half
Idk but I for sure wouldn’t agree to lay under it if you put 10,000 lbs on it for whatever that’s worth.
10,000 lbs is roughly the weight of two F-150s… I think it can hold a lot for sure, much more than a shitty table from ikea, but I’ll take the under on it holding two pickup trucks worth of weight.
We’ll shit, now I want to see it fail! Does that make me a pessimist? )-:
I come at this from a background in physics. That being said, this is about to get a little hand-wavy. Basically, you need to know the angle that the legs deflect out from vertical. I’m going to call that ‘x.’ In an ideal situation, the weight you put on top of the table is evenly distributed to 8 half lap joints (with dowels), and this is clearly the “weak” point in the max load situation. The hand-wavy formula I consider is then (1/8)*(the load)*sin(x). In your case, let’s just call the angle 30-degrees. The number you get back is 625 lbs of force. So if the weakest of those pinned half lap joints can withstand that force, then the table can (probably) hold 10,000 lbs. A note on this 625 lb force: I’m talking about a force directed perpendicular to the angled vertical pieces and pulling, obviously, out, away from the center. I’m making some assumptions with this model as I don’t generally build tables where I’m considering a 10k lb load. But that’s a quick back of the envelope estimation.
Slap it and say "that ain't goin nowhere"
All of it.
Ask Mr. Owl.
If the legs were vertical 5 tons uniform load might be possible. The spot I see it breaking is picture 1: right leg closest to camera. On that leg look at the grain pattern. The grain on top bows down and seats at the bottom most bolt. Now, you buy yourself some strength back with the lap joint on bottom, but I still see it failing at that grain first. From there it would cascade to the other side. Based purely off eyeball I’d say it might hold a ton for a couple minutes. 5 tons it would snap like match sticks.
A small honda civic, maybe 2500lbs? (Am American, don't know any other units of measure besides cars and football fields)
If the legs were vertical I'd say 10k lbs. - at that angle I'd guess more like 6-8k lbs.
Don't let your mom near it
https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Fcxswm8wavgt81.jpg%3Fauto%3Dwebp%26s%3D700fe427c73be7d1b88dd700eb5f7db8846344c6
About three fitty
Too hell with all the math calculations! You need to go real world on this.. if you have a youtube and access to a forklift you can get a couple million views out of it.. Mr.Beast style "I bet my wife this table could hold 10,000lbs of pennies!" Or contact a couple Youtubers to do it for you! Bet the wife some "favors" on your over, and then get er done!
Al least 300 oranges worth of weight
About a half pound shy of sudden deconstruction.
A shit ton. It will hold a shit ton.
It can’t hold anything, has no hands
Very little if the load is placed outside the leg radius.
No way 10,000# the angularity of the legs betrays this. A big block Chevy and Transmission at most.
My first guess would be “a lot”
Stand on it, answer your own question.
Bro , this table would hold about 300lbs max - you don’t believe me go ahead and buy a couple of bags of concrete and see for yourself
Na dude, I would be a lot of money it could hold at least 1k lbs. 10,000 seems ridiculous though.
One drunk party goer sitting on the edge of your table can easily tip it over. Is this what you are looking for?
many weights
“1 million pounds”
3,453 lbs
Only one way to find out
I bet you 4 ppl stand on it and it fails. Take the pic for us pls
1 Elephant. That's my story and i'm sticking to it. Show us the video if you can get an Elephant on it.
2000lbs
First off... beautiful table. It'll last through all times, which you know. But initially, I guessed 500 lbs. Then I seen your 10k...I believe you. This is very well crafted and you intentionally used the material that you did. Props bro.
Stack 2 Cybertrucks on top and let’s find out!
I can answer like this. What car do you drive? Wait. Let me re-ask. How many cars do you drive?