Naively and without experience, I used "working off". My mistakes

Naively and without experience, I used "working off". I was delighted with the cheapness and availability of this drug. I did not pay attention to the damage to the overalls. Now I have experience in repairing wooden houses since 1986.

He gave up waste oil, impregnation with diesel fuel and other (folk) methods back in the late 90s. Refused after he started repairing floors.

The surface of the wood after the engine oil looks loose over time. There is more mold and fungi on treated wood than on untreated wood. At first I could not understand why this is happening. The beams, logs and subfloors were sprouted by mushrooms, and the temporary supports that were not processed by the "working off" remained unaffected.

The mycologist explained simply: At the initial stage, the oil "drowned out" (vaporized) the wood. It became more difficult for the pieces of wood to dry out. In the "working off" there are no substances (antiseptics) that inhibit the development of fungi.

The oil dissolved the tree sap and destroyed the lignin. After the oil was washed out and dried, the wood lost its natural protection against mold. In the Soviet Union, much attention was paid to the protection of timber. Antiseptics, impregnations and pastes were earned.

There were also folk methods: drying oil and wax, other options with drying oils and special oils, charring, soaking in lime, in turpentine with kerosene, in paraffin solution, impregnation with vitriol and special salts.

But nowhere in the official literature have I come across the use of lubricating oils, diesel fuel and the like. I would not recommend creosote for a residential building either. Even worse is the coating with bituminous mastics.

Author: Igor Bekkerev."Send your articles to [email protected] and we will publish them! "

Subscribe to our channel, there are a lot of interesting things about summer cottages, as well as new projects of country houses every day!