iDRY Vacuum Kilns

Sponsors:

Burning poles to guard against rot and insects????

Started by Peterrum, May 01, 2008, 10:01:04 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Peterrum

I plan on constructing a pole frame structure.  The poles will be larch, about 8" in diameter, and tamped into the ground anywhere from 3-5' deep.  I am looking for an alternative to creosote and other chemicals and recall that firing the log will afford it a reasonable degree of protection.  Has anyone got any knowledge of this, have you tried it.  How is it done, over a fire, with a tiger torch, or hot steel.

Dodgy Loner

It was traditionally done in a bed of coals.  Modern research has shown that it provides no discernable protection against decay - it only kills what microbes are already present.  Once you put the posts in the ground, your sterilized wood will no longer be so.  If you can remove the sapwood from the posts, you'll get more life out of them, as larch heartwood is moderately rot resistant.
"There is hardly anything in the world that some man cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who consider price only are this man's lawful prey." -John Ruskin

Any idiot can write a woodworking blog. Here's mine.

Cedarman

Dodgy Loner, I would be interested in seeing the research that you mentioned.  I believe charring works, so would like to see what people have done that shows different.  Could you point me in the right direction.
Thanks, Cedarman
I am in the pink when sawing cedar.

Dodgy Loner

Hi Cedarman, I don't remember where the research came from right off hand, but I can look it up when I get home this afternoon.
"There is hardly anything in the world that some man cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who consider price only are this man's lawful prey." -John Ruskin

Any idiot can write a woodworking blog. Here's mine.

Dodgy Loner

A quick google search turned up a Forest Service Publication entitled "Charring does not preserve wood", dated 1920.  I could not access the file, but here is the link:

http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/dspace/handle/1957/768
"There is hardly anything in the world that some man cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who consider price only are this man's lawful prey." -John Ruskin

Any idiot can write a woodworking blog. Here's mine.

Cedarman

Thanks Dodgy Loner, I'll see if I can get into the files.
Cedarman
I am in the pink when sawing cedar.

beenthere

There is no practical apparent reason that charring should work, other than to the extent Dodgy mentioned. It's just wood lleft under the char...that with moisture, it is just food for stuff to eat and cause rot.

But suspect it feels good to those that do it.... 8)
south central Wisconsin
It may be that my sole purpose in life is simply to serve as a warning to others

shinnlinger

Peter,

I share your concerns with introducing chemicals into the ground, and I hope someone will pipe in with a better answer, but barring that, you need to consider the entire scenario.

Is it more envoronemntally friendly to use "raw" wood and risk the entire structure becoming unusable in 10 years or use a couple gallons of Timbor or something and possibly taint a small amount of soil, but in turn get 50+ years out of a structure?

I argue the later scenario is a much better use of resources and the pros far outweigh the cons, but again, I hope someone has a better answer.





Shinnlinger
Woodshop teacher, pasture raised chicken farmer
34 horse kubota L-2850, Turner Band Mill, '84 F-600,
living in self-built/milled timberframe home

Don P

Borates are probably a poor choice for soil contact. They are mobile when the wood is damp and move by diffusing from areas of high concentration to areas of low concentration. They would leach into the "sink" of the soil.

Peterrum

Thanks Dodgy for that article, I was able to get into it and the article does say that charring is basically useless.  Too bad as I was hoping that it would provide a more enviromentally sound method.  Shinn, it would be nice to get 50 yrs. out of the structure and it would be nicer if I was still around to see it standing then.  I have never heard of Timbor but will look it up.  I might have very few options here but thought I would explore the possibilities before starting the project.  Any further views are still appreciated.

moonhill

Wood rots that all there is to it.  Some just holds up better.  The first thing that comes to my mind on charring the butts is it has destroyed the sap wood which is the most likely to rot, the heart wood holds up best in most woods.  So the charring theory is based on that.  I wouldn't go the bank with this, just my thought.   There was a similar thread a while back on fence post, I don't recall how it turned out.   Tim
This is a test, please stand by...

HOOF-ER

Get cedarman to ship out some ERC. That heartwood will last almost forever, with no preservative.
Home built swing mill, 27hp Kawasaki

TeenSwinger

  I saw a pole barn not to long ago that had some kind of plastic sleeve that was slid over the end. It seems to me that something like that would work.
Jacob   
Peterson ATS 827  Nyle L200  Ebac 800  Bridgewood M-562

Tom

I am unaware of any incident, other than the manufacturing or treatment area, where treated wood leached enough chemical into the ground as harm human beings.   Here in Florida, some anal individuals with a mis guided goal to better the environment, got CCA taken off of the market.  Before the  law could even come into affect, it was announced that the problem didn't really exist.  Red tape and threats of retribution and penalization scared most manufacturers away from producing the product.

While I wouldn't want to live in a building made of all treated wood, nor burn it in my fireplace or make a habit of resawing the poles, I believe that the fear of harm from using treated poles and lumber in approved construction is unfounded.

Ten years?  In Florida, an unprotected piece of wood, with the exception of pure 'fat lighter', is not good for even a year.  Some 'lighter wood' may last indefinitely.  Some heart cedar may last for a while, as well as heart cypress, if you can find it.  But, those woods are not available in commercial quantities.


Peterrum

Quote from: TeenSwinger on May 02, 2008, 12:51:52 PM
  I saw a pole barn not to long ago that had some kind of plastic sleeve that was slid over the end. It seems to me that something like that would work.
Jacob   

Log condoms :D

stonebroke

The Iroquis indians used to char the poles for their long houses, I think.

Stonebroke


TW

Around here it has been common to char fence posts. It is rumored to increase their lifespan with a few years. No idea if this is true.

Those American pole barns surprise me. It sounds like outdated early medieval technology and not like 21st century. Around here we always avoid contact between wood and soil.

I would cast a big chunk of concrete where each post will come.  It would have two U-channels protruding at the top, back to back. I would place the post between the U-channels and fasten with through bolts. I would put a piece of bitumen felt under the end of the post.
This design avoids all contact between wood and soil and should last for at least a century.

Tom

TW,
Lots of times we see better ways too, but have to play by the rules of the bureaucracy.

Not that these are the reasons here, but they are the reasons in my state from time to time.

Poured concrete is taxed.  It is written up by the tax assessor even if only a 1'x2' slab for a pump, or back steps to the house or pillars under the house.   The tax remains forever, as long as the concrete.

Wooden poles stuck in the ground are generally not taxed, especially if for an Agricultural building. Concrete just lets the assessor deeper into your pocket.

Stacked concrete blocks are taxed too unless the Zoning dept. finds them, and then they are disallowed and you must move them for storing building supplies.  Yep that draws fines too. :)

We sometimes work under all manner of strange requirements.  Sometimes a building isn't taxed if it hasn't got walls. Sheet up a shed and it might become a taxable.  item.

I think that property taxes are the most punitive tax we have.  Better yourself and the government takes more forever.  :)

TW

Stupidity appears to rule in more than one country. Taxing concrete is almost above the stupidity level of our government. That is remarkable. ::) Barely possible....

What about placing a boulder under the post and fasten some iron bars in holes drilled in the stone. Then it would be possible to weld some plates to the bars and bolt the posts to them.....time for some creative thinking.
Or is there a tax for having stones on your property too???






moonhill

Tom, as you live in Florida I have heard just about all you have is sand.  Is this true?  Up here in Maine we do have rocks or even ledge as a footing.  We have the last remains of the last glaciation, rocks and gravel which came from Northern Maine and Canada.  I am guessing you have glacial remains in Florida as well.  Not that the Ice made it that far but the run off from the Laurentide Ice Sheet which was centered over the Hudson Bay about 25,000 years ago more than likely carried the finer particles to your location and hence a tax on concrete.  For They knew there was no way around it.  As a side note, the land mass under the long ago Ice Sheet is still rebounding like a sponge, from the weight of the ice.  This has nothing to do with pole barns but I thought it might explain why there may not be any stone in Florida.  Oh, even here on the coast of Maine we are still rebounding from up to 2 mile thick ice, which was present 18,000 years ago.  Tim
This is a test, please stand by...

Don P

This link should take you to the post frame construction guide;
http://newstore.southernpine.com/cgi-bin/newsopine/product?;38;

Our buildings here are taxed based on value, the reasons for using a pole barn here revolve mostly around cost/ lifespan expectancy. These are considered to be 40-50 year buildings. The tradeoff gain for embedment is lateral resistance, the columns are then in a fixed/pin condition. There are post frame structures that use pin/pin connection to a slab so either is possible if designed for. They get into that some in the pdf above, look at the allowable lateral loads for an embedded vs a pinned column. It is not a simple matter of switching an embedded post to a pinned column, it is do-able but it needs to be looked at if it changes design. It's a factor in the value engineering of the building.

I know how many of you feel about building for permanence let me give a scenario that might help explain the concept.
A farmer needs a barn for his operations. The barn needs to be cost "efficient", if he can't afford the debt he won't venture into the business, and the business may be good for an unknown number of years, consider that a subdivision might be more lucrative in 40 years or the market for what he is doing in the barn has shifted. Is it our place to mandate that he should build a structure for the ages? Is that a responsible use of resources. Those decisions are above me.

Dodgy Loner

Tax codes vary widely among the states.  Our buildings here are taxed according to value, not whether or not they have concrete foundations.  In some states, homes are taxed based on finished square footage, rather than on value.  One loophole in Iowa (according to my sister's in-laws) is that a basement is only considered "finished" if it has a finished ceiling.  This had led many an Iowan (in-laws included) to have elaborately finished basements, but with bare floor joists for the ceilings, to avoid paying taxes on additional square footage.

A little off topic, but I wanted to clarify that the tax codes in Florida are not consistent throughout the States.
"There is hardly anything in the world that some man cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who consider price only are this man's lawful prey." -John Ruskin

Any idiot can write a woodworking blog. Here's mine.

Thehardway

Wow! this topic has got the makings of a real barn burner (pun intended).  ;D Taxes, international and local politics, environmentalism and even a hint of science and religion.  I am surprised it has not been gotten out of hand and been removed.  Ironically it is this kind of discussion that usually turns out in the end to be very educational if permitted long enough without resorting to name calling.

I guess I find myself in agreement and disagreement at the same time on this one. 

To begin with, I don't see how charring the ends of poles could hurt,  I have seen burned stumps that have long outlasted their unburned counterparts in the same soil and conditions.  My theory is that this only works in areas where bug infestation is more likely the cause of deterioration than rot from fungus/bacterial decay.   There are certainly some bugs that no amount of charring would deter but i think others might dislike the taste and move on to better tasting wood.  I have no factual evidence to support this theory, just a hunch and the perpetuation of old folklore.

TW, weren't the foundation posts of the Stave Churches charred before being placed in the ground?  Some of them lasted quite a while though not as long as they would have with a proper masonry foundation as you point out.


As for use of treated wood, I see little place for the use of CCA preserved wood.  In no way do I like the idea of concentrated arsenic being placed anywhere.  Am I an environmentalist? No, just someone who knows how to read warning labels and knows the deadly capabilities of arsenic as well as its preserving capabilities.

There are, however, a lot of wood treatment formulations that I would have no problem using such as CA (copper azole) which is even listed as suitable for interior use.  Borate treated wood I consider safe as well.

I still am not sure why creosote is viewed as so evil.  It is ranked similar to Formaldehyde in toxicity to humans (Moderately hazardous at a 3 and 3.3 respectively) but both are only considered a danger if inhaled or with prolonged exposure to skin.  Creosotes' cancerous properties are not native but come from the blending of it with coal tar which is considered the real carcinogen.  Ironically creosote is a byproduct of wood burning, perhaps there is a link here with the post charring folklore?

Take this into consideration, most of us brush our teeth 2-3 times a day with toothpaste that contains flouride.  Floride is listed as more dangerous than coal tar, formeldehyde, or even lead but yet our all knowing government allows it to be placed in toothpaste at levels that could trulykill someone if they ingested a couple mouthfuls.  Most cities are "fortifying" their water systems with flouride as well as a "healthy" dose of chlorine which is also a known carcinogen and one of the most toxic gasses known to man.

The truth is usually found by tracing the money trail.  The government is not really interested in protecting us from environmental hazards, they just don't want anything to last forever as it would cut off the sales tax revenue stream.

Why do you think school buses and state vehicles are exempt from the low sulphur diesel fuel regulations?  For the benefit of the environment and the health of school children?


I don't know much about CCP lumber so I can;t speak to that.

I think there is much to be said for drainage when building with wood.  Good drainage around posts goes a long ways in preserving them, additionally, I am convinced that it may as or more beneficial to treat the soil around a wood post than to treat the post itself.  Chrysanthemums and their natural oils are one of the best pesticides one can get. If your wood is kept dry borates are very effective for rot and bug control.

I think one of the biggest problems we face in the US is fast grown, soft, sapwood.  It will rot almost as soon as you look at it.  Bugs love it especially when in damp conditions.  Soon the building inspectors will require all structures to be built with it and stamped by the companies that pay for political campaigns and give officials lobby money.  It also helps the big Chemical companies sell chemicals to the big exterminator companies which pay the government to be licensed and then have a monopoly on all the chemicals you and I are banned from using as we are not smart enough and did not pay the government off.

More irony in the fact that there are agricultural exemptions to the CCA treated lumber laws.  You would think that if it truly leached into the soil and water as claimed then the last place you would want to use it is on a farm where food is grown for consumption.  Perhaps the answer lies in the fact that the agricultural lobby group is one of the largest? 


Enough ranting.

If it were me I would build the building using CA sill plates on gravel or marle trenches and either bolt or mortice SYP posts into them with some braces and anchor them down with some helical anchors to keep the wind from blowing it away.  It will last as long as you will and as a bonus it can be picked up and relocated or skidded around with reasonable care.  This keeps your posts out of the ground and gives you the stability of a building with a foundation without the additional tax burden.

Moonhill, I take it you are in the field of geology?  How does one know what was here 18,000 years ago?  Just curious.  Have heard all sorts of contradictory stories on the reliability of carbon dating and stratification theories.  Perhaps we could find a modern way of producing petrification and literally turn our posts into stone, thereby avoiding the need to chemically preserve?  I hear that plasticized wood is nearing the point of production soon why not petrified wood?
Norwood LM2000 24HP w/28' bed, Hudson Oscar 18" 32' bed, Woodmaster 718 planer,  Kubota L185D, Stihl 029, Husqvarna 550XP

moonhill

The hard way, I liked your last post and your solution of a beam on grade.  I think that would work in almost any climate.  I have read  a bit on flouride and it makes me wonder, but I use it all the same.  And Diesel, I am still trying to figure that one out. 

Geologist I am not, just an interest based on political issues but mostly for a historical background to help me understand how and what our ancestors went through living here on the Maine coast.  I just have faith in the science of the two systems, radiocarbon dating and relative dating.      Everywhere I go I am looking at the land and noticing indicators of the past, be it a barn or glacial striations on a bare ledge.  Perhaps a time frame is irrelevant to the issues of today.  Tim
This is a test, please stand by...

TW

Thehardway

None of the remaining stave churches has or has ever had posts set in soil. They have a sill on a stacked stone foundation. The previous generation of stave churches, those built when Christianity first came north were according to the archaeologists built with the corner posts and staves set in soil. Those churches soon rotted out and were torn down when the present stave churches were built in the 13th century roundabout.

It is known through archaeological evidence that buildings were commonly built around posts set in soil until about the 12th or 13th century. The people back then apparently chared the post ends and wrapped them in birch bark for protection.

I agree with Don P on the subject of engineering fixed posts. My idea is to create a stiff joint between concrete and wood, that is simulating an embedded post.

moonhill

Where did the smiley face digging a hole come from. :).  They learned long ago that putting wood in the ground was a not so good idea.  Tim
This is a test, please stand by...

Don P

So this would be a bad time to bring up pressure treated basements  ;D.

Peterrum

Thanks everyone for your input.  As it stands i don't see that anyone has any definitive proof that charring would work so I will probably forgo that thought unless something new is posted.  I think that i will try it on a couple of secondary posts though as a bit of an experiment.  Look for my thread in 5 yrs. time and I can give you an update.  I love the way these threads take off, like a drunken sailor, all over the place.  Very enjoyable reading though.........

moonhill

http://iceagetrail.umaine.edu/content/iceageinmaine/iceageinmaine.php

I had to try posting a link and thought this one would would work here.  It is way off topic.  Tim

It worked and it didn't hurt a bit, and very simple. 
This is a test, please stand by...

pappy

Very interesting link Moonhill  8) thanks 

As far as post planted in the ground or even placed on top of a rock or a concrete pad I've seen folks use roof pitch like the utility company's do.. Not the most enviro friendly but it keeps the wood from rotting I guess..  ::)  At least it doesn't flow away like the fluid / oils from abandon / junk vehicles would...  I like the idea of the plastic sleeve, say use a contractor type of trash bag over the post end treated with roofing pitch...  :P
"And if we live, we shall go again, for the enchantment which falls upon those who have gone into the woodland is never broken."

"Down the Allagash."  by; Henry Withee

SwingOak

Maybe you could work out a deal with someone here who could send you some black locust.

Thank You Sponsors!