What? More woodworking?

So a few of you know that I began building the Ron Paulk style work bench. And like most that do I changed the plans a bit.

I used a Dremel and its circle cutting adapter to cut out a round ended support and used that support as a pattern jig to cut out the rest of the 25 holes. I used my trim router with a 1/2" top bearing flush cut bit to cut out all of the holes.

Supports

formatting link

Sides

formatting link

Then a load of pocket holes and screws to attach the sides and inner supports to the top, I mean the bottom, well really the top, but it is going to be the bottom. I'll explain a bit farther down why the confusion.

formatting link

Done and only awaiting the top/bottom to be attached.

formatting link

And finally the legs, 4 of them all alike except for the 2 with top extensions that will engage the bottoms of the work surfaces. I screwed all 4 blanks together, drew the pattern on the top piece and use my track saw to plunge cut through all 4 pieces of 1/2" plywood. I used my jigsaw to finish cutting the corners where the round blade could not reach on the lower layers.

The cut outs are to support long stock on one side of the work bench area. The top extension on one side of the legs is longer to support the track saw track on its back edge with parallel guides attached. It will protrude out from the edge of the work surface a few inches.

formatting link

I'll post pictures of the set up when completed. A picture is worth a load of words.

So as for the confusion of the top and bottom mentioned above. Originally the designer, Ron Paulk, used 3/4" ply wood to build 2, 24" by 96" work surfaces. This is supposed to be portable. IIRC he weighed each half of the work surface and each weighed just shy of 60 lbs. I do not consider that to be light weight or very portable for one person.

Any way his method of assembly is to pocket hole and glue the sides and inner supports into the TOP of the assembly. No problem there. then he simply glues the bottom of the assembly on top of the upside down assembly and goes straight into the edges of the sides and inner supports with screws. It would be extremely difficult to pocket hole and glue that bottom side from inside the closed assembly. That is how it was intended to be assembled.

A near by WW friend build one himself and did not realize that the edge of plywood is soft and some of his pocket holes pierced the top of the work bench, just slightly. He did not notice the offending screws until he slid a piece of oak veneer plywood across the work surface and found resistance and scratches on the bottom side.

Fast forward to me with my bench and I decided to not risk any of those screws doing the same. AND add to that the latest design that Ron Paulk came out with called for 1/2" plywood, to make that portable work bench "more portable", with a 33+ Percent weight reduction. That made pocket hole depth more critical even with 1" pocket hole screws.

So I counter sunk the screws for the bottom, but now the top side, and I will use the intended bottom side as the top side. I decided that if I were to cut into the intended top work surface there would be a pretty good chance I might run onto one of those hidden pocket hole screws. All of the screws on the bottom, not the top, are very easily seen and could be more easily avoided. So the intended bottom surface will be my top surface. There you have it.

Reply to
Leon
Loading thread data ...

Very nice! It looks like airplane wing construction. Instead of flipping it over, I suppose you could add veneer to the (other) top to hide any screws. Of course, it's more work and would add some small amount of weight.

>
Reply to
krw

I like it! I had never heard or seen that particular bench until you broug ht it up, but it looks like a winner. You can see the thought that went in to the design. After you posted on that a while back I watched a few of hi s videos and then looked at some "upgrades". All good stuff.

I think you will get a lot of use out of that setup as you can have a stabl e work table set up for your cabinet builds in pretty short order. Did you build the two piece version or the one?

Nice work as always, by the way.

Is business picking up?

Robert

Reply to
nailshooter41

Looks like you just wanted an excuse to make a bunch of zero-clearance inserts. :-p

Reply to
-MIKE-

I could but that, as you pointed out, is more weight, cost, and time. It is not suppose to be purdy. ;~)

Thank you BTW

Reply to
Leon

I built the two piece design, 20"W each, 96"L, 8"T, So the work surface is 40"x96" and I can easily handle one section. I was really looking for a large FLAT surface, precisely for cabinet work.

Thank you

No, and that is OK. I have a few projects around the house I want to do.

Reply to
Leon

NO Kidding! Ha! I did not think of that. I have already squared them up and I will hold on to them for several years. Then I'll probably throw them away. LOL

Reply to
Leon

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.