Goetsch-Winckler built in table. Modular design?

To control SPAM, you must now be a registered user to post to this Message Board.

EFFECTIVE 14 Nov. 2012 PRIVATE MESSAGING HAS BEEN RE-ENABLED. IF YOU RECEIVE A SUSPICIOUS DO NOT CLICK ON ANY LINKS AND PLEASE REPORT TO THE ADMINISTRATOR FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION.

This is the Frank Lloyd Wright Building Conservancy's Message Board. Wright enthusiasts can post questions and comments, and other people visiting the site can respond.

You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, *-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned (and your service provider being informed). The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. You agree that the webmaster, administrator and moderators of this forum have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time they see fit.
jmixon
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 4:49 pm

Goetsch-Winckler built in table. Modular design?

Post by jmixon »

Looking at building in a built in table at my parents house, something similar to the Palmer house or Kentuck Knob or the Goetsch-Winckler house.

http://4sure.co.nz/gw/goetsch-winkler-EL16.jpg

This looks modular, does anyone have any information on how its constructed? To me it seems like each table stands on its own and then they just push together? I am not sure though, is there information on how this was built?

Roderick Grant
Posts: 10614
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Post by Roderick Grant »

It seems to me that these sorts of tables that push together to form a single table should have under-the-table clasps of some sort to make the tops align properly. That wouldn't be too hard, would it?

jmixon
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 4:49 pm

Post by jmixon »

Roderick Grant wrote:It seems to me that these sorts of tables that push together to form a single table should have under-the-table clasps of some sort to make the tops align properly. That wouldn't be too hard, would it?
That's what I thought too, just wanted to see if it had been drawn up ever for the particulars.

dtc
Posts: 739
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:04 am

Post by dtc »

Does it appear that someone added a colored finish or a stain to the GW dinning table. It presents blotchy and dark.
The photo does not show any of the interior windows or doors. I believe the wood is cypress.
I know the exterior has some sort of opaque stain or paint.

dtc
Posts: 739
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:04 am

Post by dtc »

When I examined the dinning table at the Hagan house they were using small c-clamps to keep the sections in alignment.
As I recall the table looked new. It was not the case, for it had been in storage for many years, since Mr. and Mrs. Hagan loved and lived with their George Nakashima furniture, with their piece de resistance the dinning table.

SDR
Posts: 20291
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

The G/W millwork drawing published in "Affordable Dreams" shows a 2 x 3-foot "sectional table" with the note "six required." The tops and support are identical to those of the fixed table; the top is 7/8" plywood and the mitered edge is 1 3/4" high. I find no note about the connection hardware, if any.


Image


The photo linked above illustrates the issue encountered with tables to be pushed together and used as one: the irregularities found in many a floor mean that the tables don't align well with each other. Hardware to overcome this problem could be devised. The standard locking hardware for tables with leaves is similar to a sash lock, but with the advantage that it clamps the leaves together; pegs drilled into one side of each leaf mate with matching holes in the opposite edge. This visible device may not be considered acceptable in the case of these sectional tables with their finished edges.

SDR

jmixon
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 4:49 pm

Post by jmixon »

Thanks, SDR very helpful!

SDR
Posts: 20291
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

If I intended to replicate the Goetsch/Winckler modular sectional tables as shown in the drawing, I would start by increasing the width of the leg unit (making the central fin wider than shown). This would provide three advantages: the three points of contact with the floor would be spread further from each other, increasing stability and reducing any planar discrepancy from one table top to the next; it would also increase the knee room available for the sitter -- assuming that each module seats two, one on each side of the table.

Note that the fixed table as built is somewhat different from the drawing, in length and in placement relative to the chimney. But this is common in Wright, where re-thinking was the norm as a design progressed toward construction -- and it invites us to free ourselves from slavish devotion to any one solution as presented by this or that Taliesin drawing. We're perhaps safe from criticism if we respect Mr Wright's aesthetic choices while recognizing that he was his own severest critic, constantly revising and improving his many many original concepts and their details.

SDR

jmixon
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 4:49 pm

Post by jmixon »

SDR wrote:If I intended to replicate the Goetsch/Winckler modular sectional tables as shown in the drawing, I would start by increasing the width of the leg unit (making the central fin wider than shown). This would provide three advantages: the three points of contact with the floor would be spread further from each other, increasing stability and reducing any planar discrepancy from one table top to the next; it would also increase the knee room available for the sitter -- assuming that each module seats two, one on each side of the table.

Note that the fixed table as built is somewhat different from the drawing, in length and in placement relative to the chimney. But this is common in Wright, where re-thinking was the norm as a design progressed toward construction -- and it invites us to free ourselves from slavish devotion to any one solution as presented by this or that Taliesin drawing. We're perhaps safe from criticism if we respect Mr Wright's aesthetic choices while recognizing that he was his own severest critic, constantly revising and improving his many many original concepts and their details.

SDR
My father and I were looking at it more for ideas than replication. We are going to do a 3 foot deep table so to speak--from person to person across--as we have different chairs. We also may not go fully sectional, rather build a table that would seat 5 and build an add on end for another 2 people. We primarily wanted to see his ideas and plans so we could help inform ours, to see if we were missing any great ideas we'd want to implement. I'm leaning towards building a 5 seater with a kitchen wrap nook and the ability to add on to it modularly if we entertain more, which we rarely do.

SDR
Posts: 20291
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

The G/W table is also three feet across. I like a relatively narrow table; it brings diners together a bit. And if the ends of the table are narrower than the middle, diners at each end of the table might be able to see each other a bit better.

It seems that, if Mr Wright specified six of these little tables -- added to a full-length table -- he must have intended them to be used elsewhere in the house, perhaps as a second dining table at holiday time ?

I like the idea of a table where the ends pull out and leaf panels drop in as needed. This way, the table doesn't have to be dragged or lifted to extend its length. There are many examples of this design out there; here's a large and intentionally "brutal" one from my sketchbooks, with glass panels.


Image
Last edited by SDR on Tue Sep 04, 2012 10:12 pm, edited 2 times in total.

jmixon
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 4:49 pm

Post by jmixon »

SDR wrote:The G/W table is also three feet across. I like a relatively narrow table; it brings diners together a bit. And if the ends of the table are narrower than the middle, diners at each end of the table might be able to see each other a bit better.

It seems that, if Mr Wright specified six of these little tables -- added to a full-length table -- he must have intended them to be used elsewhere in the house, perhaps as a second dining table at holiday time ?

I like the idea of a table where the ends pull out and leaf panels drop in as needed. This way, the table doesn't have to be dragged or lifted to extend its length. There are many examples of this design out there; here's one from my sketchbooks.


Image
very interesting, this is of your design? And if you have any other designs ala Wright written up I'd enjoy seeing those!

SDR
Posts: 20291
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Thanks, jmixon. I indulged myself a couple of years ago with four or five "galleries" of my work, here at Wright Chat. The first and fourth collections occupy two or more pages.

My debt to Mr Wright will be apparent . . .

SDR
Posts: 20291
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

http://savewright.org/wright_chat/viewtopic.php?t=3290

The fifth one won't fit on my "signature" !

SDR

jmixon
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 4:49 pm

Post by jmixon »

SDR wrote:http://savewright.org/wright_chat/viewtopic.php?t=3290

The fifth one won't fit on my "signature" !

SDR
Very nice! You have an eye for design. Do you have links filtered to your tables?

edit: nevermind saw your 3rd gallery

peterm
Posts: 6293
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:27 am
Location: Chicago, Il.---Oskaloosa, Ia.

Post by peterm »

Wright didn't design any sort of system to hold the tables together. The tables simply butt up to each other. Believe me, they are so heavy that they don't slide around much.

The idea is that they can be used as separate units or placed together, and look good either way. Uneven floor slabs in Usonians do become issues, and often there are slight variations from a built in section and the height of the free standing unit.

Stafford Norris told me that at the Willey house (Usonian prototype), Nancy Willey specifically requested separate tables which could be combined later, after looking at Wright's original drawing showing a completely built in table. Maybe Mrs. Willey deserves some credit for influencing future Usonian modularfurniture designs? So much for the myth of the autocratic Wright who never listened to his clients!

Post Reply