OldTools Archive
Recent | Bios | FAQ |
265406 | John Ruth <johnrruth@h...> | 2018‑03‑13 | "Patina" vs. "Crud" |
Gentle Galoots: I'd like to hear some points of view on when is it appropriate to clean off "crud" vs. "over-cleaning", which removes the "patina" Case in point is a wooden machinist chest which is going to need some TLC because somebody pried open every one of the individual drawer locks. |
|||
265409 | Erik Levin | 2018‑03‑13 | Re: "Patina" vs. "Crud" |
John Ruth wrote: > I'd like to hear some points of view on when is it appropriate to clean off > "crud" vs. "over-cleaning", which removes the "patina" and: > In other words, it's already wrecked to the point where it will never be a > display piece, but rather a user. I think you answered your own question, here. Make it the user you want it to be. If it was historic in nature, that is a different issue, but a machinist chest (presuming it isn't a special, hand mode prototype Gerstner or one fashioned by Maudslay during his apprenticeship), especially if physically damaged and already modified, is not worth the trouble to restore, IMHO. > The next step might be a trip to the furniture refinisher's lye tank, to > saponify any remaining surface oil, but I think I'm not going that far. I'm glad to hear that you are not truly insane. Unless, of course, it is Maudslay's tool case... *** This message was sent from a convenience email service, and the reply address(es) may not match the originating address |
|||
265410 | Kirk Eppler <eppler.kirk@g...> | 2018‑03‑13 | Re: Fwd: "Patina" vs. "Crud" |
On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:28 AM, Dwight Beebe |
|||
265412 | Ed Minch <ruby1638@a...> | 2018‑03‑13 | Re: "Patina" vs. "Crud" |
John hide glue may not survive the dunk Ed Minch |
|||
265415 | Thomas Conroy | 2018‑03‑13 | Re: "Patina" vs. "Crud" |
Erik Levin wrote: "...a machinist chest (presuming it isn't... one fashioned by Maudslay during his apprenticeship), is not worth the trouble to restore, IMHO." Layers of oily filth coming off on the hands wouldn't be a problem with Maudslay's chest. If ever a man was obsessive-compulsive.... The conservation orthodoxy is that you start with the gentlest method of cleaning and get what you can with that before going on to the next roughest. You can't leave actual dirt in place, not if it endangers the object itself or could be transferred by someone's hands to another object. Unless, of course, its something like the Donner Party diaries and papers, which they have in the Bancroft Library here, from which no-one would dream of cleaning the soot, grime, water stains, fat, blood... Back to the point, a conservator will use water (or, actually, damp on a paper towel); then detergent foam; and slowly up through alcohol to rougher solvents if you actually must. And you re-evaluate what you are aiming for after each step. It doesn't always work out that way in practice. I restored a huge late- Victorian finishing press. 4" square cheeks and 28" long, filthy and with the wood rough. I went through the water and detergent,and found that no matter how long I wiped, I still got dirt transferred to the wipe and the wood had a dirty surface. Went to alcohol, figuring to take off the shellac and the dirt with it. Things got no better; in fact worse. Then went savage and started using steel wool instead of paper towels, then started scraping with a wooden scraper. The alcohol semi-disolved the degraded wood on the surface, and it mixed with dirt and old finish to form a gloppy viscous mess that looked like diahorrea but smelled a bit better. Eventually I debrided down to solid wood, planed the insides of the cheeks where they hold the book, fixed broken parts, and soaked in linseed oil with mineral spirits. I won't go into the practicalities of soaking a 4x4x28 balk in BLO. Where I planed the cheeks it was pretty clearly maple, but the other surfaces were heavily rounded and "organic" in shape, and a deep brown like old cherry or walnut. The brown color, I could see on the planed surface, sank in a half an inch, but the wood was solid. It came out beautiful, but I have never used it. Not once. I've worked with salvaged chestnut saturated with machine oil (it was part of the frame of a pen-ruling machine, and had been catching spurts or drips for decades.)The oil penetrated deeply, and even light scraping left a gummy-feeling residue on the surface. If I recall correctly I had to plane off about an eighth of an inch, then had a surface where the oiliness was mild enough that I could soak the piece in BLO, and the combinationof oils dried sufficiently to make the wood handleable. Don't count on being able to reduce deep oil stains by rubbing the surface with solvent, or even with a soak tank. Deep oil may still seep out over time. BLO is your friend. Tom Conroy |
|||
265416 | Claudio DeLorenzi <claudio@d...> | 2018‑03‑14 | Re: "Patina" vs. "Crud" |
Cleaning machinist boxes I agree with the stepwise approach proposed, but considering all the damage and filth on some of these, I would go right to a detergent based cleaner after wiping down with a solvent. I happen to like old fashioned turpentine, since you can use it safely on old shellac as well as old BLO surfaces. No one mentioned it, so I thought it might be worth consideration. I have used crud kutter as well as the Castrol Degreasing spray which worked better for me. If a lot of the old finish is damaged and flaking, I try to figure out what it was, and proceed accordingly. I have tried those citrus based cleaners which don’t really work for me, although they help deodorize. I hate that old fermented gym sock smell found on some of these. Sometimes the lacquer thinner/acetone/denatured alcohol is your only solution for the badly damaged finishes. I like BLO for all workshop stuff (you can use it over just about any of the old tyme finishes without issues, and I will then use shellac to seal the insides of drawers, followed by a wax rub made from beeswax and turpentine. It gets rid of the old mouldy smells of barn finds. I make sure everything has dried out properly before starting any additional finishes. Sometimes the moisture level on these is really high from being stored in damp basements. I enjoyed the repair photos- thanks for sharing. Cheers Claudio |
|||
265421 | paul womack <pwomack@p...> | 2018‑03‑14 | Re: "Patina" vs. "Crud" |
Thomas Conroy via OldTools wrote: > Back to the point, a conservator will use water (or, actually, damp on a paper towel); then detergent foam; and slowly up through alcohol to rougher solvents if you actually must. Interesting - a lot of museum conservation is done with manual mechanical methods (picks, scalpels etc), because they can be stopped instantly. Any solvent (even water) can be hard to STOP. I guess books (perhaps fabrics too) require different methods. BugBear |
|||
265427 | Thomas Conroy | 2018‑03‑14 | Re: "Patina" vs. "Crud" |
On Wednesday, March 14, 2018, 2:17:13 AM PDT, paul womack |
|||
Recent | Bios | FAQ |