For help selecting the proper type of treated wood for any setting, consider consulting the primary standard-setting body for treated wood, the American Wood Protection Association AWPA. If you have questions about this, or any pesticide-related topic, please call NPIC at am - pm PST , or email us at npic ace. A solution of common salt, for instance, serves to preserve meat and fish, while it accelerates the decay of woocJ It was said that coal tar is the same as wood tar, and fur nishes creosote, but the truth is, coal tar differs materially from wood tar, and contains no creosote.
It was further stated, that the mere distillation of coal tar is sufficient to convert the same or part of it into creosote, and the coal tar, which distilled over by increased heat, and was found heavier than water, was deceptively called "creosote," sold as creosote, and used as creosote to "creosotize" wood and preserve it yielding, through such misrepresentations, large revenues to the gas works and inventors of various processes to impregnate wood with gas tar or its products.
The first man whom we find engaged in the creosotizing patent business, and probably the most candid inventor, was Franz Moll in A. He found, by practical experiments, that the so-called " creosote of coal tar " was worthless to protect wood from decay. He ascribed its failure to the presence of other substances therein, with which the " pure creosote " is associated, and strongly recommends its previous purification with alkaline lye, similar to Reichenbach's process described above.
When coal tar is heated in a still by gradually increasing heat, the product first obtained, which is lighter than water, is called by him " eupion," the heavier liquid obtained thereafter he calls "creosote. Moll's British patent was granted in , and is the more interesting, as his process is based on the best principle, so far known, to saturate wood with liquids, and as his specification accounts for the necessity of tedious operations, without which he finds the application of the products of gas tar of no practical advantage.
His process is as follows : The wood is placed in a close chamber, which is connected with one or more stills. He begins the operation by heating the inside of the chamber by a steam pipe or elsewise, to about Fah. The water from the damp timber is then drawn off, and eupion, previously sufficiently purified, is heated in the still, from which the vapors enter the chamber.
When the wood is considered sufficiently impregnated with the eupion vapors, the surplus vapor is drawn off, and vapor from a still containing creosote, also previously purified, is then admitted, and finally boiling liquid creosote is introduced into the chamber by a pipe in a quantity sufficient to cover all the wood therein.
After the whole has become cold, the wood is removed from the chamber. He describes the following experiment, made by him "on balk of good oak which was rather in a damp condition, thS same was fourteen inches square, and about ten feet long, which, on being submitted to the vapors of eupion for about six hours, when cut in two parts, was found to be impregnated proportionately, even to the heart, with eupion, and when the two parts were afterward submitted to the vapor of creosote, and boiling creosote, the same was found to have taken effect within 12 hours.
But subsequent experiments have proved that it is better to submit the wood or timber for a comparatively short time to the action of the vapors of eupion and creosote, and depend more on the liquid bath, as described, this process being less liable to crack the wood or timber than the vapors. But I am bound to state that the above-described method of washing the substances, and applying them separately, will be found far superior in use, as the volatility of the eupion and its fluidity will allow its rapid penetration into the timber more perfectly than when in combination with the cresote, whose entrance the former will greatly facilitate when once lodged in the pores through the affinity of the two substances, and as by these means the quantity of eupion can be regulated which is to be absorbed by the wood ; moreover, the antiseptic power of the creosote will be augmented by the washing and freeing from matters mixed with it.
The process just described by Moll as his simplified operation, was reinvented thirty years thereafter and patented here, A.
Robbins, of New York, and the patent was lately purchasedby "The National Patent Wood Preserving Company," by whose order a pamphlet was published last year under the title of " Discovery of a Lost Art of the Egyptians.
Patented in England in He applies the " creosote," or coal tar, in its liquid state, without any previous purification. The wood is placed in a pressure tank, from which the air is exhausted previous to the introductionof the "creosote," which is then forced into the pores of the wood by a pressure pump.
Bethell's process, being the most simple and quickest in its operation, was extensively used, and of the results we have reliable reports. David Stevenson, the eminent English engineer, states that although highly recommended to him by Bethell, he found such creosotlzed wood to be wholly unfit for use on piers or other water structures, as it was soon destroyed, perforated, and eaten off in places where the creosote abounded, though the most favorable location had been selected for trial, and every precaution used by Bethell in the preparation, the wood having been creosotized after being cut into the shape in which it was applied, Civil Engineer and Architects Jowrnal, vol.
London, Jerry Walker Heath reports ibidem, vol. John Bethell himself stated ibidem, vol. The causes of the failure are explained by the fact that coal tar does not yield any creosote, even if treated in like manner as wood tar, which often yields as much as 25 per cent of creosote. The substance obtained by the treatment of coal tar is carbolic, or phenic acid, which differs materially in its properties from the real creosote.
Being an effective disinfectant, carbolic acid does not prevent fermentation nor purification; on the contrary, Ilisch, of St. Petersburgh, found that some substances impregnated with a solution of carbolic acid showed the formation of mold within a fortnight. This circumstance, taken in connection with the fact that coal tar resinifies and hardens quicker than wood tar, explains the failures observed by Hyett, Stevenson, Heath, and others, when used in a wet place, where the tar cannot quickly dry and form a hard coating.
This also explains why nothing but a hard mass outside remained in the rail tie spoken of by Bethell, where all wood within was gone, leaving the resini-fied tar as the " hard, black mass.
Experience and science seem to teach that the use of coal tar or its products is, in most cases, more detrimental than advantageous for the purpose of preserving wood.
Thank you, I understand. You provide a great free resource to many and I would never think of complaining about any input given here. I think my nervousness about the issue caused me to ask some unneeded questions. Keep up the good work, thank you again. On mod - OPM advice for gray landsape ties that worry property owner about creosote hazards. Chris Typically people remove creosote treated wood from areas where it's likely to be a hazard such as in a children's playground or where runoff is likelyl to contaminante a nearby water source.
The gray color argues against your wood ties being creosote - which is normally brown or black and brown 2. You have run into the OPM problem that I describe at OTHER PEOPLE's MONEY If you press a consultant or purported expert beyond what they can reasonably be expected to know or promise in any absolute term they become guarded and ultimately will feel a strong impetus to toss in the towel, simply telling you to do what is absolute safest - for themselves, avoiding any possible future complaint from you that they didn't give you sufficiently safe or proper advice.
The result is they will spend your time, money, trouble, effort, to reduce their risk, even though they themselves consider the recommended steps overkill or unnecessary.
That pressure produces this final OPM advice for you: Yes you should remove all of the landscape ties, having them professionally lifted, packaged, and hauled to an acceptable construction or household waste site, since you don't want to simply store them elsewhere on your property. You should also have your well tested for an appropriate range of potential biological and chemical contaminants, using test screens recommended by your local water testing lab, but including organic contaminants such as creosote and other wood preservatives, fungicides, pesticides.
Watch out : Do not attempt to burn wood waste as doing so may release toxic chemicals in the smoke and ash from such fire. In addition, depending on your water test resutls, you may need a water purification and treatment system if not regular testing if you want to assure that your drinking water remains safe. When the in-question landscape ties have been removed, to allay your enviornmental concerns for your pets, you should have soil testing performed, again with advice from your local environmental test lab, to be absolutely certain that the soil around your home is free of contaminants and safe for your dogs as well as for humans.
Watch out : if your landscape ties are not creosote-treated, depending on their age and just how they were treated with a wood preservative, if CCA chromated copper arsenate was used, there could be a copper or an arsenic hazard such as arsenic from physical contact or arsenic contamination of nearby water supplies.
Finally, check with your own local and state or provincial environmental and health department authorities to be sure that your actions are in compliance with appropriate laws. On by Chris - IF a wall like this was creosote treated, would removal be preferred over letting it be? I ask [for a third time] about replacement of this retaining wall aside from concern about the well.
I ask because I know some hazardous material is better left undisturbed. Also, my sniff test did show a smell similar to other creosote treated wood. I don't have an opinion about the wood beyond what we've already discussed. As you were concerned about the possibility of well water contamination, although we have not established creosote, I did emphasise a couple of times thi importantce of proper water testing and well protection.
On by Chris - so do I have to remove these landscape ties or not? Sorry to be redundant. Would you recommend removal of this wood in this situation if it was railroad ties? Or is leaving as is better?
Thanks Just did the sniff test. Definitely smelled something once I put my nose right up to it. To test it out, I also smelled a nearby telephone pole that I know was put in creosote at one point. Same smell. With this being the case, what would you say would be the best fix for this? Replace wall? Anything in relation to The well that would make sense to do in this situation? On by mod - creosote treated timbers are brown or black and brown, not gray.
Did you try the sniff test? Creosote, even on very weathered wood, still has a distinctive odor. Usually weathered creosote-coated wood never turns so gray as your ties, and as we've said a few times, the dimensions do NOT argue for RR ties nor for creosote-treated wood. Ok thank you. I should have also mentioned that some ties were rectangular about 6.
Several ties be were exact inches but 6. Chris: The proper way to protect your well from contaminants that could leach from the ground surface is to properly construct the well to not allow surface water to leak into the water supply, and to test the water periodically for contaminants - testing at least for bacteria that can serve as a telltale indicator of surface runoff entering the well.
Besides creosote contaminating soil and water and skin and people and other animals , older landscape ties may have used toxic wood preservatives such as copper arsenate. Those are no longer used. The small "cracks" you see running parallel to the wood grain are artifacts of the machinery used to plane and move the wood through its production process.
I've seen those mostly on landscape timbers but also on some railroad ties. The color gray , dimensions not those of railroad ties and absence of visible creosote argue no black or brown tarry deposits against your wood landscaping timbers being railroad ties.
If the wood is pretty soft in un-damaged areas, it's not a railroad tie. Nor do we commonly find rot on creosote treated wood. If these were railroad ties, is it probable this would effect the well water? Any other issue with these ties if I left them as is? Thank you History of Creosote.
They did so with confidence because creosote treated ties: can be easily and safely installed will last for an average of 30 to 35 years will maintain their shape will withstand temperature changes, vibration and compression will resist drifting out of position do not require insulators readily allow electric signal current to flow can be reused and recycled as a biomass fuel utilize a renewable resource — wood contribute to conserving and extending timberlands No single substitute can match all of these performance characteristics.
0コメント