I want ideas to increase the penetration of oil finishes in cherry and walnut (& other) for two main reasons:
1. Increase the chatoyance / moire / shimmer / reflective depth in the wood.
2. Increase water resistance due to more finish resin deeply impregnated into the wood.
I'm not a newbie to oil finishes - we have done hand-rubbed oil finishes exclusively for 20 years - probably $10M plus product in the field - very high-end flooring, doors, wainscoting, cabinetry, ceilings and furniture. We use polymerized tung oil and a linseed oil based UV cured oil. We've used D-limonene (citrus oil) as the thinner. I have a pine BT vanity in my house on which I used above finishes and in 5 yrs have never had water rings even though people in the house don't wipe up (as I do!!) under the liquid soap bottle or splashes from the sink. Also an elm dining table top that never rings up - though the table top I wipe on a couple coats of PTO (Polymerized Tung Oil) at least once a year as daily wipe downs with dishrag seem to strip the finish a bit.
I'm looking for ideas to increase penetration and increase the pluses of #1 and #2 above - ideas?
I've heard that heating the oil (linseed) does not really increase penetration but my own quick tests were inconclusive.
1. Solvent and technique ideas?
2. Crazy idea - would putting the wet boards in a pressure chamber for a few minutes help penetration? Anyone actually tested this?
3. Crazier idea - would putting the wet boards in a vacuum chamber for a few minutes help? Anyone tested this?
For this thread please keep all responses related to OIL finish penetration and do NOT talk about comparisons with other finishes.
Multiple applications of the oil finish as follows: First coat should be flooded into the wood, wait thirty minutes, remove excess with lint free T shirt material. Let dry for 24 hours. Then the process starts.
Second coat, flood the oil onto the surface of the wood, begin wet sanding with 200 grit Wet/Dry Sandpaper. I use a festool orbital with no vacuum. Thoroughly sand the entire area. Let the slurry sit on the surface for 10 to 15 minutes, then remove the excess oil. Wait 24 hours. Next step is begun with 400 grit. Same procedure as above. Wait 24 hours. Next step is with 800 grit. After that, proceed with 1000 grit, followed by 1200, then 1500 and then 2000. Always wait 24 hours between wet sanding. The wood pores will be totally filled and a mirror finish will appear.
The end result is a pretty nice. But it will take you about two weeks to achieve
A vacuum is going to draw air out of the wood, so it will bring all the oil to the surface. Not what you want. On small work, I use the heal of my hand to build up some heat while the oil is on the surface. I haven't applied an oil finish in decades. Just couldn't make money taking that long to apply a finish. Customers could care less is my opinion. What if I WANT to talk about other finishes? What happens?
Scott, I have a question, am I clear to understand you are curing the oil you use under UV lamps?
Couple things, yes soaking it in a big vat would work, way back in the day a company called "The Bare Woods" in SanDiego stained everything this way.
But, Very oily wood and glue joints may not hold up over time. I have had glue joints let go on maple dining tables from people that are heavy lemon oil users.
Vacuum Chamber will work, Pull a heavy vacuum and then inject oil under vacuum. Better have a big check book for that option.
I think you need to reformulate your product, but if you UV cure the deeply penetrated oil may not crosslink also.
Lots to think about.
It is the oil I am trying to get in deeper, not so much the color - we successfully dye after the first couple oil coats on cherry (no blotching ever). So let's assume for this thread that all we are doing is oils only - no colorants. I want to deepen the reflectivity of the wood and get more moisture protection.
I have a small Pizzi glue pot, I think I will do an experiment with a board cut in half and put one piece in the pressure pot wet with oil then take out and wipe after 5-10 min, and the other let soak at atmospheric pressure for same time then wipe both and compare after curing.
I am also concerned about the soaked in oil curing adequately as UV may not reach in as far as the oil penetration. more experiments...
I do wonder about thinning and/or heating the UV oil as well.
Does anyone know a green natural thinner that is faster evaporating than D-limonene (citrus peel oil)?
Can't teach an old dog a new trick or you can lead a horse to water but can't make him drink.... I'm flabbergasted at the way people buy in to things like this is the magic way to do things.... Oil finishes can have their place but where we are today with how finishes have been developed in this century why not use a product that offers clarity.. flexibility.. moisture resistance, mar resistance, uv inhibitors and many other characteristics that these great engineers have developed in film coating technology... all wrapped up in an easy to use package... you can still have close to the wood finishes these days with superior protection.. I just don't understand why people slave hours over oil... where it takes weeks to finish something? and then stand back in awe like they did something.... Wow. shoot the dang thing with two coats of a superior product today and build your next project... labor is expensive
I don't get why you would use a UV curing system if you're trying to allow the finish to penetrate deeper. It would seem time is your friend. IMHO chatoyance is based on having a lens (hard coating) to look into the wood. A super tight finish to me would be the opposite as the light gets soaked up by wood grain.
I'm a little bit confused about how you use chatoyance, i.e. the rippling, cats-eye effect. You seem to imply that allowing an oil finish to penetrate deeper will increase the chatoyance.
My understanding of chatoyance (and I've a very strong background in materials science as well as wood technology), is that the primary cause is cross-linking of wood fibers (or stone for that matter). Adding oil will definitely highlight the existing chatoyance; so will a very light stain; which is a very common treatment for both curly and birdseye maples. Your diligence in adding the oil must clearly bring out the existing chatoyance, but I cannot see how adding more oil can increase it, since the root cause comes from the fibers, not the finish.
Scott - your hypothesis that increasing the penetration of a drying oil will improve reflectivity/chatoyance/shimmer and water resistance is wrong.
The properties of various finishes, including drying oils, is well documented and can be found with just a little research. Look for moisture excluding effectiveness - MEE. Drying oils are at the bottom of the performance list.
Any finish that provides good clarity will bring out the directionality in the wood grain. The article I'm attaching explains the cause and effect well. To enhance the effect, you can use dyes, glazes, and toners.
Click the link below to download the file included with this post.
You may be quite right - we might already have maximized bringing out the inherent chatoyance of the wood. My assumption, which may be wrong, is that I might be able to bring out more with deeper oil penetration which will allow the light to go in and reflect out deeper - sort of like how putting oil on a sheet of white paper greatly increases the amount of light that can pass thru. Or another way to put it that might awaken more readers - sort of like the difference that a bucket of water makes on a dry white t-shirt on a beautiful young woman without anything on under the t-shirt... the water brings out the inherent color and beauty that is within. To tie this back to an oil finish - a top coat of finish on the t-shirt will not help, it is the liquid IN the fabric down to the skin that allows the light to penetrate and reflect the color and beauty back out.
I think the reason the pine vanity top in my bathroom has done so well is that the pine, being soft, soaked up a lot more oil than a hardwood. That hardened oil is what gives the water resistance. I'm hoping if I can increase the penetration on hardwood that I can increase the water resistance and still have the close-to-the-wood look and feel rather than having it look like it's been dipped in plastic.
Nice work Todd. Must be nice shooting
clears all the time :-). I'm currently in a pigmented finish streak of 5 jobs in a row. Pays more for sure but.......I could do without Bondo and caulking for awhile.
I believe the reason that you achieved superior results adding more oil to pine is simply a function of density, i.e. the wood fibers are not as densely packed. Adding more oil makes sense for pine. For hard maple, rosewood, or even walnut or cherry, I doubt that additional oil will penetrate much beyond what initial soakings provided.
FORUM GUIDELINES: Please review the guidelines below before posting at WOODWEB's Interactive Message Boards(return to top)
WOODWEB is a professional industrial woodworking site. Hobbyist and homeowner woodworking questions are inappropriate.
Messages should be kept reasonably short and on topic, relating to the focus of the forum. Responses should relate to the original question.
A valid email return address must be included with each message.
Advertising is inappropriate. The only exceptions are the Classified Ads Exchange, Machinery Exchange, Lumber Exchange, and Job Opportunities and Services Exchange. When posting listings in these areas, review the posting instructions carefully.
Subject lines may be edited for length and clarity.
"Cross posting" is not permitted. Choose the best forum for your question, and post your question at one forum only.
Messages requesting private responses will be removed - Forums are designed to provide information and assistance for all of our visitors. Private response requests are appropriate at WOODWEB's Exchanges and Job Opportunities and Services.
Messages that accuse businesses or individuals of alleged negative actions or behavior are inappropriate since WOODWEB is unable to verify or substantiate the claims.
Posts with the intent of soliciting answers to surveys are not appropriate. Contact WOODWEB for more information on initiating a survey.
Excessive forum participation by an individual upsets the balance of a healthy forum atmosphere. Individuals who excessively post responses containing marginal content will be considered repeat forum abusers.
Responses that initiate or support inappropriate and off-topic discussion of general politics detract from the professional woodworking focus of WOODWEB, and will be removed.
Participants are encouraged to use their real name when posting. Intentionally using another persons name is prohibited, and posts of this nature will be removed at WOODWEB's discretion.
Carefully review your message before clicking on the "Send Message" button - you will not be able to revise the message once it has been sent.
You will be notified of responses to the message(s) you posted via email. Be sure to enter your email address correctly.
WOODWEB's forums are a highly regarded resource for professional woodworkers. Messages and responses that are crafted in a professional and civil manner strengthen this resource. Messages that do not reflect a professional tone reduce the value of our forums.
Messages are inappropriate when their content: is deemed libelous in nature or is based on rumor, fails to meet basic standards of decorum, contains blatant advertising or inappropriate emphasis on self promotion (return to top).
Libel: Posts which defame an individual or organization, or employ a tone which can be viewed as malicious in nature. Words, pictures, or cartoons which expose a person or organization to public hatred, shame, disgrace, or ridicule, or induce an ill opinion of a person or organization, are libelous.
Improper Decorum: Posts which are profane, inciting, disrespectful or uncivil in tone, or maliciously worded. This also includes the venting of unsubstantiated opinions. Such messages do little to illuminate a given topic, and often have the opposite effect. Constructive criticism is acceptable (return to top).
Advertising: The purpose of WOODWEB Forums is to provide answers, not an advertising venue. Companies participating in a Forum discussion should provide specific answers to posted questions. WOODWEB suggests that businesses include an appropriately crafted signature in order to identify their company. A well meaning post that seems to be on-topic but contains a product reference may do your business more harm than good in the Forum environment. Forum users may perceive your references to specific products as unsolicited advertising (spam) and consciously avoid your web site or services. A well-crafted signature is an appropriate way to advertise your services that will not offend potential customers. Signatures should be limited to 4-6 lines, and may contain information that identifies the type of business you're in, your URL and email address (return to top).
Repeated Forum Abuse:
Forum participants who repeatedly fail to follow WOODWEB's Forum Guidelines may encounter difficulty when attempting to post messages.
There are often situations when the original message asks for opinions: "What is the best widget for my type of shop?". To a certain extent, the person posting the message is responsible for including specific questions within the message. An open ended question (like the one above) invites responses that may read as sales pitches. WOODWEB suggests that companies responding to such a question provide detailed and substantive replies rather than responses that read as a one-sided product promotion. It has been WOODWEB's experience that substantive responses are held in higher regard by our readers (return to top).
The staff of WOODWEB assume no responsibility for the accuracy, content, or outcome of any posting transmitted at WOODWEB's Message Boards. Participants should undertake the use of machinery, materials and methods discussed at WOODWEB's Message Boards after considerate evaluation, and at their own risk. WOODWEB reserves the right to delete any messages it deems inappropriate. (return to top)
Forum Posting Form Guidelines
The name you enter in this field will be the name that appears with your post or response (return to form).
Personal or business website links must point to the author's website. Inappropriate links will be removed without notice, and at WOODWEB's sole discretion. WOODWEB reserves the right to delete any messages with links it deems inappropriate. (return to form)
Your e-mail address will not be publicly viewable. Forum participants will be able to contact you using a contact link (included with your post) that is substituted for your actual address. You must include a valid email address in this field. (return to form)
Subject may be edited for length and clarity. Subject lines should provide an indication of the content of your post. (return to form)
Thread Related Link and Image Guidelines
Thread Related Links posted at WOODWEB's Forums and Exchanges should point to locations that provide supporting information for the topic being discussed in the current message thread. The purpose of WOODWEB Forums is to provide answers, not to serve as an advertising venue. A Thread Related Link that directs visitors to an area with inappropriate content will be removed. WOODWEB reserves the right to delete any messages with links or images it deems inappropriate. (return to form)
Thread Related File Uploads
Thread Related Files posted at WOODWEB's Forums and Exchanges should provide supporting information for the topic being discussed in the current message thread. Video Files: acceptable video formats are: .MOV .AVI .WMV .MPEG .MPG .FLV .MP4 (Image Upload Tips) If you encounter any difficulty when uploading video files, E-mail WOODWEB for assistance. The purpose of WOODWEB Forums is to provide answers, not to serve as an advertising venue. A Thread Related File that contains inappropriate content will be removed, and uploaded files that are not directly related to the message thread will be removed. WOODWEB reserves the right to delete any messages with links, files, or images it deems inappropriate. (return to form)
The editors, writers, and staff at WOODWEB try to promote safe practices.
What is safe for one woodworker under certain conditions may not be safe
for others in different circumstances. Readers should undertake the use
of materials and methods discussed at WOODWEB after considerate evaluation,
and at their own risk.