It sounds like it would work. At least I think 18" is enough space for one to sit while all four legs are on the rug. I would even think in most cases one would be able to get in and out of the chair without having to move it off the rug. I've never put a dining table on a rug because of this dilemma. I Googled "60" round table on *' round rug" and found the link below where someone asked a similar question and another shared a photo of their 54" dining table and chairs set on an 8' round rug. Here is a link that might be useful: [Scroll down on link to see photo. Mouse over to see enlarged.[(https://www.houzz.com/discussions/how-much-room-is-needed-for-a-60-round-table-with-6-dining-chairs-dsvw-vd~112917)

well, if the rug was really square it would never be 8x9 but 8x8 or 9x9. The rug should extend beyond your table a minimum of 2' all around, so a 9' round rug or 9' square rug would work better since 54" + 24" + 24" = 102" which is 8'-6".

I like the ones Patricia posted. Not only do they look more comfortable, and I can attest to rush seats because I have them, but they are more rounded . I have found that on a round table square seats rarely fit well. Something more rounded physically fits better and if you desire to squeeze more people in on occasion you're able to do so. With a square chair that isnt the case. I suppose the old adage of not fitting a square peg into a round hole may somewhat apply here.

Somehow I was talked into buying this last night on Wayfair my daughter loved it thought it would look great in here I hope y’all agree. I’ll probably keep my Pottery Barn chairs for the time being since they are neutral and replace with some fun colored chairs once the rest of the living room is finished. Desperately need coffee table and accent chair ideas.