—— < v zsgqézzeisg wens menus m swamp: 0r woos A THESIS FOR THE BEGREE 0F MSTER OF SCIENCE IN fURESTRY 1948 BY ROBERT W. LABERGE THESIS This is to certify that the thesis entitled Various Factors Affecting the Stabilization of Wood presented bg ROBERT W. LA BERGE has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for MASTm OF Small—degree ileEESIBY fling/W r professor Datefl Q ,._ Z121; VARIOUS FACTORS AFFECTING THE STABILIZATION OF WOOD By ROBERT W. LA BERGE *- A THESIS Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of. MASTER OF SCIENCE IN FORESTRY Department of Forestry 1948 THESES VARIOUS FACTORS AFFECTING THE STABILIZATION OF WOOD 204085 vow.» TABLE OF CONTENTS HISTORICAL BACKGROUND PAGE 1 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS HYGROSC OPICITY OF WOOD PERMEABILITY OF WOOD WOOD STABILIZATION LABORATORY METHODS FOR TESTING THE WATER REPELLEN CY OF WOOD THE PROBLEM ABSORPTION STUDY 1. EFFECT OF SAMPLE SIZE AND TREATMENT TIME 3.. SELECTION AND PREPARATION OF MATERIAL FOR TREATMENT b. TREATMENT PROCEDURE C. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 2. EFFECT OF VARYING THE SPECIFIC GRAVITY a. SELECTION AND PREPARATION OF MATERIAL FOR TREATMENT b. TESTING PROCEDURE c. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 10 10 10 10 13 13 15 15 l5 l6 B. WATER REPELLENCY STUDY 1. SELECTION AND PREPARATION OF MATERIAL FOR TREATIVIENT . TESTING PROCEDURE . DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS LITERATURE CITED PAGE 16 16 17 18 21 25 28 ACKNOWLEDGMENT The writer wishes to eXpress his appreciation to Dr. Alexis J. Panshin, Professor of Forestry, whose timely advice and graSp of the subject aided in surmounting. the many problems encountered in this study. Acknowledgment is also extended to the Forestry Department and the Agricultural Experiment Station for grants and materials used in the problem. INTRODUCTION Although wood is used in the construction of almost all modern dwellings, builders and owners of prOperty often experience the instability of this indispensable material. For example, windows and doors cannot be opened or closed during certain periods of the year, and many other structural units are affected similarly by this seasonal change in dimen- sion. To rectify this fault in wood has been the objective of many investi- gators, and from their investigations have been developed a number of substances called water repellents which retard the dimensional changes in wood. Yet despite all of this research, which has been considerable, there still exists uncertainty in regard to the proper methods and treat— ments to be used with various woods. To diSpel a measure of that uncertainty is the purpose of the present study. Two commercial water repellents labelled respectively (A) and (B) and one softwood (ponderosa pine) were used in the experiments, the results of which are presented in the report that follows. The investi- gation may be divided into three major parts: 1. The study of the effect of varying the sample and treating time on the percent absorption of water repellents. 2. A study of the effect of varying the Specific gravity on the percent absorption. 3. The determination of the effect of sample size and treatment time on the water repellent efficiency. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND From the earliest periods of history to the present time, man has used various materials to render boats water-tight and to protect homes and buildings from excessive exposure to moisture. Today these substances are known as water-proofing compounds. Little information exists on the progressive development of the process for waterproofing wood. Yet we do know that pitch (4) was used at an early time for sealing the seams of boats, and evidence for the use of materials like grass, burlap and sheets of lead beneath wooden structures to prevent the entry of water at their base was found in the ruins of Roman buildings 2,000 years old (6). No mention of treating wood with any other water impermeable materials exists from this period to the time of the discovery of the New World. Then it was learned by Pizarro (3) from his travels among the Peruvian natives that a rubbery substance called Caoutchouc was used by them to coat certain articles. Later, a method which did not prove to be of immediate consequence but which laid a foundation for future investigators to follow was developed in 1812 by Lukin (7), who attempted to inject ship timbers with resinous vapors. Not long after this, in 1838, John Bethell (1), credited with being the first person to use cylinder methods for impregnating wood, coagulated the albumin in the sap of wood in order to render it water—proof. No further develOpments in waterproofing occurred until the latter part of the nineteenth century when the patent offices were flooded with applications for patents on almost every conceivable process for waterproofing wood. Confusing as this welter of processes appears to be at first glance, they can be classified into two broad categories, Chemical and _l_\l_o__n_-Chemical Methods. A further study of these processes will quickly demonstrate that the Chemical Methods fall into three general classifications. Of these the first and simplest method is the surface sealer which prevents the interchange of moisture between wood and the surrounding atmos- 'phere. Among the many workers who deve10ped repellent efficiencies as high as 95 percent by this method are Hunt (12) and Dunlap (5). A second chemical method consists of injecting material into the inner parts of wood. Thus the cell walls of the wood fibers are coated with a repellent which retards dimensional change. The third and final chemical method modifies the wood substance. Stamm (21), for example, aflected the crystal lattice of wood by using inorganic salts, but Herzog and Hung (22) approached the problem with a process quite different. After first softening the lignin, they then added substances of low vapor pressure to stabilize the wood. On the other hand, Stamm and Seborg (27, 28) evolved the method of bonding synthetic resins to wood. Probably the most advanced of the chemical methods was developed by Tarkow, Stamm, and Erickson (30), who formed a chemical derivative of wood by using acetic anhydride. Thus the resulting wood had less affinity for moisture. Of the two non-chemical methods, the first uses high temperature, thereby rendering wood plastic with subsequent stabilization of the wood, whereas the second, used in making plywood, consists of placing the grains of adjacent pieces of wood at right angles to one another. The latter process is particularly effective for the prevention of excessive dimensional change. Of these many methods and repellents, only a few have proved to be adaptable to commercial use. Even where repellents have been used commercially, their high cost has restricted their use only to those units which cause considerable trouble by their changes of dimension, units such as doors, window frames, and sashes. Such com- mercial repellents are manufactured either as concentrates or as ready- to-use solutions, the most popular being those which are dissolved in volatile solvents. Loss of the solvent deposits the repellent on the cell walls of the wood'fibers. Beset with many problems, the repellent industry faces consider- able competition from the metal and plywood industries. Yet the prOSpects for the future appear promising, and further developments and advances may be confidently expected in this field. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS The gygroscppicity of Wood. Because of its rigid nature, strength, and workability, wood has been used for many years as a structural material. One of the limitations in its use, however, is its hygrosc0picity, i_._e_._, the affinity which wood has for moisture. According to Stamm and Millet (26), wood behaves like a colloidal substance and possesses the prOperty of moisture absorption, swelling, and shrinking. The similarity between a colloidal substance and wood becomes apparent by the fact that wood absorbs moisture from its surroundings, and it will continue to do so until the moisture content of the wood and that of the surroundings are in balance with each other. If the moisture content of the‘ surroundings is increased, wood will continue to absorb moisture until the fiber walls become saturated. When such a condition as this exists along with the absence of free water in the fiber cavities, it is known as the fiber saturation point. The sorption and desorption of moisture by wood causes it to swell and shrink, which is indicated by changes in its dimensions. The Peggneability ofngod. In studying the treatment of wood with chemicals, the early investigators sought to explain the inter-cellular movement of liquids. Erickson, Schmitz, and Gortner (8) believe that the unit responsible for liquid passage is a Special structure of the cell wall called the pit membrane, which is illustrated in the accompanying sketch. The pit membranes have valve-like structures called a torus, which under cer- tain conditions can be pulled to one side of the pit aperture, and thus I close the cell cavity. Artificial scam-10 m OIWHTPAMIIMUALVI' passageways may result from checks on the cell walls and will [I'll'll flllll influence the movement of liquids. III! """"""llll Phillips (17) states that there are fewer pit closures in the summer— u...lu.-ulllll/Illlla....-...... wood. Resin ducts and radial ( A l ( n ) ducts were found by Teesdale (31) mm to be effective passageways for liquids. Scarth (18) and Teesdale ( A l A nee-nu ordered pit pair ( B l A bordered pit pair with “pirated turns (31) dec1ded that summeI'WOOd i Pit epertm 2 Pit ell-her 3 m... was more penetrable than the L Pit ennuiue : Springwood. An interesting point is brought out by Sangerlan, PJohnston, and Mass (20) that temperatures above 70 degrees Centigrade cause increases in the penetrability. Accord- ing to Hunt and Garrett (13), the tangential section is superior to the radial section in penetration. E093 Stabilization. A few of the approaches to this problem have already been mentioned. It will be advantageous, however, to have an outline of the methods used to stabilize wood. There are two approaches to the prob- lem. By one method all the water is removed from the wood, and then various treatments are carried out in order to prevent moisture from reentering the wood. The other method consists of retaining the moisture in the wood and then using different treatments to stabilize that moisture. In turn, each of these two methods has many variations, which will be indicated by the following outline: I. Moisture exclusion methods. A. By formation of water-impermeable coatings on the surface of wood. 1. The manner in which the material is applied is to dissolve the impervious material in a non-aqueous solvent which has a low melting and boiling point. Anti-shrink and swelling efficiencies for this type of treatment are very good. Another method of preparing a coating on the surface of wood is to use a material which can be applied in the liquid form and which, when exposed to the weather, will form an insoluble coating on the wood. Drying oils and semi-drying oils are examples of such materials. Emulsions are used to cover the surface of wood. In order to make the material to adhere to the wood, some substance is added to break the emulsion, thus causing it to Spread out and form a coating. By formation of water-impermeable coatings within the wood, on the fibers, and within the fine structures of the fibers. 1. By direct coating of the fibers, using water-impermeable materials, with various penetrants and Spreaders. By replacing the water in the wood with a non—volatile substance (24). By formation and precipitation of insoluble physico- chemical reaction products. Involved in this group are the colloids, saponifiable materials, and emulsions. By the formation of insoluble and impermeable condensa- tion products within the fiber structure of wood. The principle of this method is to form compounds of high molecular weight which will fill up the fine spaces of the fibers and coat the cell walls with the impermeable material. By formation of polymerized products that are bonded to the fibers. The solutions are injected into wood, and, when the desired penetration is obtained, the solutions are polymerized with subsequent bonding to the fibers. (9), (14), (19), (27), (28), (29), (33)- By physical modification of the hygrosc0picity of wood. 1. 2. By heating at elevated temperatures (32). By alternating the grain of wood at right angles to each other (28) . 3. By heating wood in the presence of various gases, such as oxygen, hydrogen, and air (25), and in the presence of moisture (11). D. By a chemical modification of the hygroscopic nature of wood. 1. By the use of acetic anhydride to produce a substance that has less affinity for moisture than the unaltered wood (30).. Thionyl chloride (15) has been used to accomplish the same result. II. Moisture retention methods. A. By the use of surface sealers. B. By concentrating the water of constitution. 1. Use of inorganic salts (21). 2. Use of organic compounds, such as sucrose, glucose, potato molasses, and sucrose-urea combinations (23), (16). Laboratory methods for testing the water repellency of wood. In order to arrive at a satisfactory comparison between Specimens, a careful selection of samples is necessary. In regard to these samples, particular attention must be paid to the number of rings per inch, to the amount of summerwood'present, and to the grain alignment. According to Browne and Schwebs (2), even when these variations among samples are controlled, there exist differences among samples that cannot be related to an easily recognized property. Some of these uncontrol- lable factors are the aSpirated pits and surface checks in the cell walls of wood. Differences in sample size will set up differences in treating results and water repellency. Large Specimens absorb a moderate amount of repellent per cubic foot, which, according to Browne and Schwebs (2), is roughly proportional to the depth of penetration into the end grain of wood. A gradient of water repellent concentration is set up between the treated and the untreated portion. Therefore Small specimens receive greater absorptions of water repellent per cubic foot. Six methods have been prOposed (2) for measuring the water repellency of treated wood: (a) The National Door Manufacturers’ Association Method, (b) The Bureau of Ships Method, (c) Protection Products 1 and 7 day Methods, (d) The I. F. Laucks Curl Test, and (e) The Western Pine Association Swellograph Method. Up to the time of the writing of this report, there was found to be no one standard method used by the repellent industry to evaluate treated wood. The manner in which the water repellent efficiencies are eval- uated is determined by the formula developed by Stamm and Millett (26). shrinkage and shrinkage and swelling of control - swelling of Anti-shrink = samples treated samples efficiencies shrinkage and swelling of control samples 10 THE PROBLEM The major objectives of this report are: (I) to determine if the sample size, treating time in proprietary water repellents, and Specific gravity have any effect on the percent absorption of water repellents; (II) to determine if the sample size and treatment time in water repel- lents have any effect on the water-repellent efficiency. (I) Absorption study. A. Efiect of varying the sample size and treatment time on the absorp- tion of water repellents. 1. Selection and preparation of material for treatment. It was decided to use for all studies in this report tangential sapwood samples of ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa Dougl.). The wood was carefully selected with respect to its density, number of rings per inch, and grain alignment. When received, the wood had an average moisture content of 10.5 percent. The wood was roughly cut and surfaced down to the dimensions of 6’ x 1%” x 11,-” by the use of a joiner. In the preliminary experiments there was a definite indication that the Specific gravity had an effect on the percent absorption of water repellents, proof of which is given on page 13. Thus there were two possibilities of sample selection. One was to select all samples of a given specific gravity or 11 within a variation of 1 to 3 percent. The difficulty of obtaining this constancy and the small amount of material available pre- vented the selection of samples on this basis. The other method of sample selection was to use the average Specific gravity in all stages of experiment. This being possible, therefore one hundred samples of each of the following dimensions were cut: 2” x 1%” x %”, 3” x 1%” x %”, 4” x 1%” x %”, and 5” x 1%” x %”, making a total of 400 samples. The samples were then put into a conditioning cabinet for a period of two weeks at a temperature of 40 degrees centi- grade. At that time, an equilibrium moisture content of 3.2 percent was reached. Before the samples were treated with a water repellent, the 100 samples in the size group to be tested were weighed on a torsion balance and next arranged according to the second method of sample selection, _i_,._e_., by arranging the samples accord- ing to weight into two groups of 50 samples each. One group was to be used for repellent (A) and the other for repellent (B). These groups of 50 samples were further divided according to weight into five groups of 10 samples each. These groups represented the different treating times of 15 sec., 1 min., 3 min., 30 min., and 1 hour. Thus 10 replications, all of the same approximate specific gravity, were obtained for each test. The same sampling technique was followed for the other sample sizes. PLATE 1 12 13 , 2. Treating procedure. The samples for the various size and treating times were assembled in specially built wire dipping baskets (Plate 1). The wood samples were separated from one another by the use of wire- mesh screens, which prevented the pieces of wood from sticking to one another during the treatment. Preliminary tests having shown that the percent absorption increased when the solution was stirred, the repellent solutions were agitated during the test by a 60 cycle Fultork motor. This procedure resulted in the reduction of surface effects between the wood and the repellent solutions. The time of dipping in the repellent solution was de- termined by the use of a Kodak timer. The surfaces of the wood samples were wiped after being dipped in the repellent solution and weighed on a torsion balance. The increase in weight was recorded, and the net percent of absorption determined. 3. Discussion of treating data. Tables 1 to 8 include the essential treating data for the study of the effect of sample size and treatment time, on the per- cent absorption. Graphical representation of the results is shown in Figures 1 to 5. Results of the preliminary experiments (Fig. 1) show the shape of the absorption curve for prolonged periods of dipping. The curve reveals that within the first hour of dipping 55.9 percent of the total repellent was absorbed. It may be noticed (Tables 1 14 to 8 and Fig. 2 to 5) that large absorptions take place in a very short time, samples treated for 1/4 minute having comparatively high absorptions. This trend is evident throughout the sample sizes. The reasons for the rapid initial absorption may be accounted for by the porous nature and dry condition of wood samples. Further penetration of the repellent into the wood is retarded by the entrapped air in the wood, which creates a back pressure retarding the flow of solution. The overlapping arrangement of longitudinal tracheids and aspirated pits set up barriers to the free flow of liquids through the wood. Other factors have already been mentioned (see page 5) which cause a differential slowing down of absorption. The over-all effect of increasing the sample size on the percent absorption is shown in Figure 4, where it is demonstrated that for small samples the percent absorption is large for both repellent (A) and (B). Increasing the size of samples one inch caused a considerable decrease in the percent absorption. Further increases in sample size show slight decreases in the percent absorption from one smaller to larger size, indicating that the effect of the end penetration is becoming less important. Water repellent (B) has larger absorptions for all sample sizes up to 4” x 1%” x %” and for all treating times up to 30 minutes. 15 B. Effect of the Specific gravity on the percent absorption of water repellent (B). The purpose of this eXperiment is to substantiate the claim that the specific gravity influences the percent absorption of water repellents. 1. Sample selection and preparation. Tangential sapwood ponderosa pine samples were selected for varying Specific gravities. The grain alignment and number of rings per inch were kept constant. The samples were prepared in the same manner outlined in the study immediately preceding this, the only difference being the use of one sample size 3” x 1%” x %”. After the samples were cut to this dimension, they were measured with the extensometer used for determining the dimensional changes of wood (Plate 2). All samples that varied by 10 thousandths of an inch were discarded. The remaining samples were then conditioned in a cabinet at 40 degrees centi- grade for two weeks, at the end of which time their moisture content was 3.25 percent. After being weighed and arranged according to increasing weights, the samples were next divided into four specific gravity ranges. (1) 0.3853 to 0.4128, (2) 0.4128 to 0.4404, (3) 0.4404 to 0.4679, and (4) 0.4679 to 0.4954. 2. Testing procedure. The samples were dipped in agitated water repellent (B) for a period of 10 minutes, according to the procedure outlined on page 13. The samples were weighed after the treatment, and the net percent absorption determined. l6 3. Discussion of results. A definite relationship was conclusively demonstrated to exist between the percent absorption of water repellent (B) and the specific gravity of wood (Fig. 6). The smaller the Specific gravity, the larger are the percent absorptions. The effect of specific gravity on the percent absorption is more pronounced at lower specific gravities. It is evident from this experiment that a definite Specific gravity range must be specified when one is working with absorptions of water repellents. (II) Water Repellency Study. The purpose of this study was to determine if the increasing of the sample size and the lengthening of the treatment time in water repellents had any effect on the water-repellent efficiency. 1. Selection and preparation of material for testing. Untreated control samples were prepared from 6’ x 1%” x %” tangential sapwood ponderosa pine samples, the wood being cut into the following sizes: 2” x 1%” x %”, 3” x 1%” x %”, 4” x 1%” x %”, and 5” x 1%” x %”. The samples were then tested for uniformity of dimensions by an extensometer (Plate 2), and those with variations of ten thousandths of an inch were discarded. Ten samples for each size group were then selected and conditioned at room temperature for thirty days. The treated samples used for the absorption study were also conditioned for a period of thirty days in a manner similar to that which was 17 applied to the untreated control samples. 2. Testing procedure. Plate No. 2 shows the apparatus used to measure the dimensional changes of wood. The immersion tank was filled with water and brought to a constant temperature by the use of equipment consisting of heating coils, electronic relay, and thermostat. A few drOps of 1 percent sodium pentachlorophenate solution were first added to prevent bacterial and fungal growth, and the water in the tank was then agitated by a 60 cycle Fultork motor. The untreated control samples were next taken, and the tangential dimensions were measured by the use of the extensome- ter (Plate 2). These samples were put in the immersion tank, and the change in their dimensions was determined every fifteen minutes for a period of six hours. The samples treated with water repellent (A) and (B) for various sizes and water repellent treatment times were then tested for changes in dimensions in a like manner. The water-repellent efficiency of each repellent was then calculated by the following formula: Change in dimension Change in dimen- of untreated control - sion of treated Percent efficiency = sample sample of water repellent Change in dimension of untreated control sample 18 3. Discussion of results. The essential data on this experiment are contained in Tables 13 to 17, and a graphical representation is shown in Figures 7 to 20. Figure 7 shows the effect of sample size on the average dimensional change of untreated control samples. It shows that the most rapid change of dimensions takes place in the first two hours of immersion in water. In general, the larger the sample size, the greater the dimensional change. The manner in which the rate of swelling takes place is the same in all samples. The over-all effect of varying the length of treating time in water repellents on the water repellent efficiency is not too great. The differences between the various treating times is less noticeable for the shorter water immersion v periods. The longer the samples were treated in repellent solution, the greater were the percent efficiencies during the shorter water immersion periods. Moreover, there is a definite over-all effect of the size of a particular sample on the water- repellent efficiency for all immersion periods in water. The smaller the sample size, the lower the percent efficiency. Further, the change in water repellency is greater for the first two hours of immersion in water. The percent efficiency for all treating times in repellents and sample sizes approaches a linear relationship for the longer immersion periods in water. 19 N "Parana 20 Figure 20 shows an evaluation of the water—repellent efficiencies of water repellents (A) and (B). The effect of sample size and treatment time in repellent solution on the water repellent efficiency is larger and more uniform in the case of water repellent (B). After the completion of this study on water repellency, and additional experiment was made to determine if the specific gravity had any effect on the average dimensional change of samples immersed in water. Untreated control tangential ponderosa pine samples were used for the test with specific gravity ranges of 0.3853 to 0.4954, and the procedure already outlined (see page 17) was used to determine the average dimen- sional change. The results were subjected to a rank correlation analysis, from which it was determined that, for the specific gravity range used there exists little correlation between the average dimensional change and the specific gravity of wood. 21 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE Three analyses were made in order to establish the significance of the results. These were: first an analysis of the data on the absorp- tion of water repellent by ponderosa pine samples; and second and third, analyses of the water—repellent efficiencies of samples which were treated with water repellents (A) and (B) and which were immersed in water for 15 minutes and 6 hours. From the absorption analysis it was determined that the results obtained by varying the sample size were highly significant, particularly the effect of varying the treating times on the percent absorption. For each sample Size and treatment time in repellent solution there was found to be no significant difference between the absorptions for water repellent (A) and (B). Therefore, it is concluded from the analysis of variance for absorption that the methods used to determine the effect of sample size and treatment time on the percent absorption of a water repellent are satisfactory. The results of the analysis of variance for the 15 minute and 6 hour water immersion periods Show that there was a highly Significant difference in water repellent efficiency for all sample Sizes and for samples treated with water repellents (A) and (B). However, the effect of treatment time in water repellent solution on the water-repellent efficiencies was not significant for the 15 minute water immersion period, but was significant for the 6 hour water immersion period. 22 Thus the sample size and type of water repellent appear to be the important factors affecting the water repellent efficiency. Only for long immersion periods in water does the treating time in repellent solution become important. 23 Analysis of variance No. 1 Analysis of the data on the absorption of water repellent by ponderosa pine. DEGREES OF SUB/IS OF MEAN SUMS SIGNIFICANCE SOURCE FREEDOM SQUARES OF SQUARES Totals 399 4663.9 Sub—groups 39 3706.1 Size 3 1386.4 462.1 173.7 ** Time 4 2133.0 533.2 200.5 ** Repellent 1 4.8 4.8 1.8 N .8. Error 360 957.8 2.66 No. 2 Analysis of the data on the percent efficiency of water repellents immersed in water for 15 minutes.- DEGREES OF SUMS OF MEAN SUMS SIGNIFICANCE SOURCE FREEDOM SQUARES or SQUARES Totals 399 58,062.8 Sub-groups 39 37,468.7 Size 3 14,7285 4,909.5 85.8 ** Time 4 111.4 27.8 2.0 N.S Repellent 1 1,384.2 1,384.2 24.2 ** Error 360 20,594.1 57.2 W 24 No. 3 Analysis of the data on the percent efficiency of water repellents immersed in water for 6 hours. DEGREES OF SUMS OF MEAN SUMS SOURCE FREEDOM SQUARES OF SQUARES SIGNIFICANCE Totals 399 156,113.9 Sub-groups 39 65,785.2 Size 3 47,454.2 15,818.1 63.0 ** Time 4 2,374.3 593.6 2.4 * Repellent l 11,210.3 11,210.3 44.7 ** Error 360 90,3287 250.9 LEGEND: N.S. = Not significant ** Significant Highly significant 25 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The following factors affecting the stabilization of wood have been studied: ,1. Effect of varying the sample size and treatment time on the percent absorption of water repellents (A) and (B). 2. Effect of varying the specific gravity on the percent absorption of water repellent (B). 3. Effect of varying the sample size and treatment time on the percent efficiency of water repellent (A) and (B). 1. It was eSpecially important in this study to deve10p a preper 5. testing technique in order to obtain reproducible results. The results obtained by any absorption test are directly related to the Specific gravity range used. The rate of absorption of water repellent is the greatest during the initial stages of dipping, about 55.9 percent of the total absorption taking place the first hour of dipping. The rate of absorption decreases as the time of dipping increases. There is a rapid absorption of water repellent the instant wood comes in contact with the repellent solution. The percent absorption of water repellents is influenced by the temperature of the wood and of the repellent solution, as well as by the agitation of the solution and the moisture content of the wood. Increasing the length of sample decreases the percent absorption. However, increasing the length of sample beyond 3 inches showed 10. 11. 12. 26 smaller differences in absorption than the shorter samples. This is owing to the effect of end penetration becoming less important as the size of the sample increases. Water repellent (B) Showed consistently higher percent absorp- tion than repellent (A) for all sample sizes up to 4 inches in length and all treating times in repellent solutions up to 30 minutes. Specific gravity influences the percent absorption of water repel- lents. The greater the specific gravity, the smaller the percent absorption. In general, the greater the percent absorption, the higher were the water-repellent efficiencies. The average dimensional change of untreated control samples immersed in water increased with the sample size, while the average dimensional change of treated samples decreased with the sample size. The water—repellent efficiency was increased by increasing the length of samples. The average change in dimensions of treated and untreated samples immersed in water was larger for the first two hours of immersion in water than for the following 4 hours. Varying the treating time in water repellents had little effect on the water-repellent efficiency. Water repellent (B) showed greater repellent efficiencies for all sizes and treating times in water repellents. 13. 27 The analysis of variance showed Significant results for all stages of study, except for the effect of treatment time in repel- lent solution on the water-repellent efficiency for the 15 minute water immersion period. Treatment time in repellent solution was, however, Significant when longer water immersion periods were used. 28 A LIST OF REFERENCES 1. BETHELL, J. Preserving timber with the use of eighteen oils. (Abstract of original patent specifications). Eng. Pat. No. 7,731 (July, 1838). 2. BROWNE, F. L. and A. C. SCHWEBS. A study of methods used in measuring the water repel- lency of water repellents and water repellent preservatives for wood. Forest Products Laboratory report No. R-1453 (1944). 3. COMPTON’ S PICTURED ENCYCLOPEDIA AND FACT INDEX. Caoutchouc used as a waterproofing agent. 12:163 (1919). Use of wood tar pitch, coal tar pitch, and Persia pitch. 14:12 (1919). 5. DUNLAP, M. E. Protecting wood from moisture. Ind. Eng. Chem. 18:1230-2 (1926). 6. ENCYCLOPEDIA AMERICANA. Surface coatings for wood and a study of the early use of lead sheets. 29 (1941). 10. 11. 12. 29 ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITTANICA. Lukin'3: 680-1 From S. B. Boulton. “The Antiseptic Treatment of Timber.” Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. 78:12—74 (1884). ERICKSON, H. D., H. SCHMITZ, and R. A. GORTNER. The permeability of wood to liquids and factors affecting the rate of flow. University of Minnesota Agr. Expt. Sta. Tech. Bull. 122 (July, 1937). HEMNIING, C. B'. Waterproofing of organic polymer emulsions. (Abstract of original patent specifications). U. S. Pat. No. 2,346,755 (April 18, 1944) . HERZOG, R. o. and A. HUNG. Flexible and waterproof wood. (Abstract of original patent Specifications). Fr. Pat. No. 713,476 (March 18, 1931). HOLZVEREDLUNG, G. A method of treating wood. (Abstract of original patent specifications). Eng. Pat. No. 168,064 (Aug. 18, 1921). HUNT, G. M. Efiectiveness of moisture excluding coatings on wood. U. S. Dept. Agr. Circ. 128:1-28 (1930). 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 30 HUNT, G. M. and G. A. GARRATT. Wood Preservation. McGraw-Hill Book Company, N. Y. (1938). MILLETT, M. A. and A. J. STAMM. A treatment of wood with urea resin forming systems. Forest Products Laboratory Bull. No. R-1632. Part No. 1 Dimensional stability (Nov., 1946). MOELLER, F. A waterproofing compound. (Abstract of original patent specifications). Eng. Pat. No. 145,610 (June 29, 1920). PECK, E. C. The hygrosc0pic and anti-shrink values of var- ious chemicals. Forest Products Laboratory (1941). PHILLIPS, E. W. Movement of water through pit membranes in coniferous woods. Jour. of For. 7:109-120 (1933). SCARTH, G. W. The structure of wood and its penetration. Paper Trade Jour. 86: T53-58 (1928). SCHRODER, D. P. Process of waterproofing wood. (Abstract of original patent Specifications). Gr. Pat. No. 295,053 (June 16, 1914). 20. 21. 31 SOUTHERLAN, J. H., H. W. JOHNSTON, and O. MAASS. Further investigations of the penetration of liquids into wood. Canad. Jour. Res. 10:36-72. STAMM, A. J. Effect of inorganic salts on the swelling and shrinking of wood. Jour. Amer. Chem. Soc. (May, 1934). Forest Products Laboratory Report No. R-1156 (May, 1934). 22. ‘ U. S. Dept. Agr. Misc. Pub. 240 (1936). 23. 24 Minimizing wood shrinkage and swelling by a treatment with sucrose and inert sugar. Ind. Eng. Chem. (July, 1937). Forest Products Laboratory Report No. R-1143 (July, 1937). . STAMM, A. J. and L. A. HANSEN. Minimizing the shrinkage and swelling of wood by replacing . the water with a non-volatile material. Ind. Eng. Chem. (Dec., 1935). 25. Minimizing of wood shrinkage and swelling. Effect of heating in various gases. Ind. Eng. Chem. (July, 1937). Forest Products Laboratory Report No. R-1142 (1937). 32 26. STAMM, A. J. and M. A. MILLETT Surface properties of wood. Jour. Phy. Chem. 45:43 (1941) . 27. STAMM, A. J. and R. M. SEBORG. Minimizing wood shrinkage and swelling. Treatment with synthetic resin forming materials. Forest Products Laboratory Report No. R-1110 (1936). 28. The anti-shrink treatment of wood with synthetic resin forming materials and its applications in making a superior plywood. Forest Products Laboratory Report No. R-1213 (1938). 29. STEWART, P. M. A varnish, paint, or waterproofing compound. (Abstract of original patent specifications). U. S. Pat. No. 1,464,224 (Aug. 7, 1923). 30. TARKOW, 151., A. J. STAMM, and E. C. ERICKSON. Acetylated wood. Forest Products Laboratory Bull. No. 1593 (May, 1946). 31. TEESDALE, C. H. Relative resistance of various hardwoods to injection with creosote. U. S. Dept. Agr. Bull. 101. 33 32. TlEMANN, H. D. Prevention of shrinking and the Powell Process. Southern Lumberman, 145:(1825) 51-52 (1932) . 33. U. S. DEPT. AGR. TECH. NOTE. Water resistant cold press albumin glue. Tech. Note No. 202 (1936). 34 5039828 .300th one no @5956 .3 «conned cowgaonm no Segue 5305893 3838.“ng no 3.3qu 1.. a 0.9me mg a.“ 08.3 madman 4 m N a o n n. a 4 _ . not 5610qu smeared ON .A n v «8283 he»... he e30": 288“»: '3 @5936 3- eude (Hale ed» USE He aeeuun l. n 95”.: 35 .82:- 5 I: 9:33 emd .H In IIIIO emu. M ed llllC lad .H en Illa. em." I IN It!!! eeee m-«a-en-en “Hull Ill": euue an: ma 5 ad a 63% Send eneeuem £5 23:33 be»: he Backhoe: vague.— eno so IS $5.32. 93 euue 9353 en» and? «0 ocean .I N 95»: 035qu 5 elau $5.93: 3 On 3 an ON 3 o h em H um I em H ea u o .3 . nu all “e 3 ha u\ \ I. o.— I g Send watch: Percent absorption Percent absorption 36 I ls __. 1* — legend 13 .—- x -- Inter repellent ( B l 12 ._ o «rates-repellent (a) 11 .— Out.- 10 F'- ,,, I L 1 l 2" a ll' 2 l' 3" x l" x l' A' x 15" a I” 5" a ii" If Sample size Pisure L -- The effect or sample size on the percent absorption of water repellent ( A ) and ( B ) for all periods or dipping. l7 ,— 15 -. legpnd 11 x - Inter repellent ( A l O -- Water repellent ( B l 9 .- 7 t— 5 l l A Dipping tine in ninutes Pleuro 5 -- The effect of dipping tine on the percent absorption of water repellent 37 .a.m V pcoaaomoh nova! Mo doduqhomnw aqoonom onp do hua>wnw cauwoomm one wnwhnwb no vacuum an o onswwm hodbmaw ofihaooqm «ma¢.o muo¢.o ¢o¢<.o mma¢.o mmmm.0 — m.~H _/x . — q notquosqn quoozog .oaap Mo mcowhom ucfihnab new nouns ca congQCEH moamawm Honpqoo dopmonpqd no owqwno Haaowmcmaac owaho>< us 38 Renae: . nouns aw mad» aofimnosaH 5 absent o n q n m a o _ _ . L. _ w 0 cm H gfl n gm 1:... o :m N am." H sq {in 1 II on :-NcmHH:m till 0 8 :m H :wd u :N llll K .II! \«F enam oamadm OMHHHHHHHHHH\\\\\V . Qq x nV|||I|||.~nuuull1|ue e o 4 l«\\\\¢\o\ .l. 8 «II‘ ill 11‘ cm qout un JO spunsnouq u; saueqo Inuogsuemxp OQCJQAV 39 .. 4 . enema-me.— ueose us hoe-«go 2.3.»! .0935 I 8. one»: .. 4 . caudal!" sece- wo 52.33%. 2838 89;: c. 2. can»: .932. . gen 5 Ida ecu-he! .952. . gen 5 I: e33! a a n a a o o a a n a a o b 2 _ _ _ q _ _ a _ _ _ J _ _ i J on m. I an m. m. n O 5 n» on N R m m. 0 m m 2. 2. 8 8 Lazanbnaueeglu L :4. 23488 338583.2934! a E...- ..<. aglflioluouggo «388 $2.5... o as»: .53. 983.: In... adj 333.9812: 1:» Sis-In 0 m i n N d O 0 n 9 n N H O 8 _ _ _ _ _ q _ _ _ _ _ n a on a on w. a u m o m R u m a m 0 m m 2. 2. m I 8 .‘NI “CH" 8 2 emu-San L .auufiuuuuofi- Sale 4O .. n . uneaueaeu gen he hogan: oneoueq ewenebd an 9 938: “eased . he»: 5 .3 Queue! 0 n d n N a o a — _ _ _ I‘ R tad H In «Cudo Gaga” .. m . 23:83 noose no 53338. uneoueq awake: in n." .53 . .3».- 3 I: 82.8an o n ¢ n N . a o _ _ _ _ _ _ .5: a I .5: n “xxxx :3; xxx I. .3: an xx .5. 8 \ l '3 l 0523 [a H lad N In "Qua. 0d“! u louetotue scene; 93»: an Om [onetorue aueozq .. n . waddle..— .ueuee we 5333.8. case“!— eeaue: In 1 99»: .eg . gel 5 '3 63:! o a a n a a o 7 _ _ _ _ . ea u a: u 5 "end. Qua-In L A n . £3.33?— ueuee no honed—vane ones“!— 4woue>< .- «a .992. . no»! 5 8:» Baton-H o a e n ~ a o _ _ q A d — em I la." fl eN "one. lamina u 3 on u ... 0 e U 1 O J a w 0 V. O U 0 l on oo 93»: ca 2 .od J 0 e U 1 u 3 U 0 1e. 0 u 0 1 2. 8 41 .3"? 0253 :6 no.“ . m . anedneaeu ken-lea hon—equate .eeuue one! «He he .5 unedneeeh use: no ueneueute accouoa on» so wadnaqe no end» on» madnuwr no nodseem nu 5H ousuuu oneouea ego no wcameae no and» en» wquhuep no euasoom u: ea onus“; .993. . Recon 3 e5» 63:! .953 . nous: 5 e3» undone! w n .x n a a o o w. .x n n a o - H _ — _ _ d _ _ _ d _ _ a L a l 3 l 3 x ./ \x on x x .1 old. On\\ \\\\ On Jan Sxxx x x s in. a x x x x s 51 a x 8 x. l 3 .5... n I: 9:23 as an. on @523 8 l 8 8 53398.? non-W39: a; eneeuem Percent efficiency Percent efficiency L0 80 42 '1 V. ./../. /;~/ // ./ r I -- 2' x 13' x i' g —- .--3e31§ex§e A -- L! x 15' 1 §' *— ous-xu-xp I 4 1 I I J 0 1 2 3 I. 5 6 Imcrsicn time in water ( hourn) Figure 18 - Influence of sample size on the percent efficiency Figure of ester repellent ( A ) for ell times of dipping. if // i n ua-xu'el' o ua'anH' —’ ‘ut‘xwxi' . “se‘ue‘rn Inereicn time in water ( houre) l9 -- Influence of sample size on the percent efficiency of enter repellent ( B ) for all tines of dipping. 43 Percent efficiency so \ \ 7o _ x -- Water repellent ( B ) x \ 0 ° x 60 _ \ x 50 I-- \ c F- \ 1 l l l -- water repellent ( A.) 31. l 1— O l 2 3 I. 5 6 Immersion time in water ( hours) Figure 20 - A.comperison of the percent efficiency of water repellent (.A ) and ( B ) far all sizes and all dipping times. TABLE NO. 1 Absorption data for (2” X 1%” X 1%”) tangential ponderosa pine samples treated with water repellent (A). Sample Treatment Weight of Weight of Net Percent No. time sample before sample after absorption absorption treatment treatment in grams based on the bone dry weight 1 16 seconds 8.61 9.62 1.11 13.46 2 ” 8.79 9.69 0.90 10.66 3 ’ ’ 8.93 9.87 0.94 10.87 4 ” 9.00 10.00 1.00 11.67 6 ” 9.06 9.99 0.94 10.72 6 ’ ’ 9.09 9.97 0.88 9.99 7 ” 9.17 10.19 1.02 11.47 8 ” 9.38 10.31 0.93 10.23 9 ” 9.76 10.64 0.89 10.66 10 ” 10.00 10.81 0.81 8.36 10.80 Ave. 11 1 minute 8.67 9.68 1.01 12.02 12 ” 8.88 9.96 1.08 12.86 13 ” 8.94 10.01 1.07 12.36 14 ” 9.01 10.21 1.20 13.74 16 ” 9.06 10.06 1.00 11.39 16 ” 9.10 10.16 1.06 12.02 17 ” 9.47 10.36 0.89 9.69 18 ” 9.80 10.70 0.90 9.47 19 ” 10.20 11.49 1.29 13.06 20 ” 8.74 9.74 1.00 11.80 [1.84 Ave: 21 3 minutes 8.71 9.90 1.19 14.09 22 ” 8.90 9.96 1.06 12.18 23 ” 8.98 10.14 1.16 13.33 24 ” 9.19 10.44 1.26 14.03 26 ” 9.07 10.31 1.24 14.10 26 ” 9.10 10.19 1.09 12.36 27 ” 9.19 10.22 1.03 11.66 28 ” 9.66 10.88 1.32 14.26 29 ” 9.94 11.04 1.10 11.42 30 ” 10.36 11.76 1.40 13.96 113.13 Ave: 31 30 minutes 8.67 10.16 1.48 17.62 32 ” 8.72 10.18 1.46 17.28 33 ” 8.89 10.32 1.43 16.61 34 ” 8.99 10.39 1.40 16.07 36 ” 9.03 10.49 1.46 16.68 36 ” 9.07 10.30 1.23 13.99 37 ” 9.11 10.68 1.47 16.66 38 ” 9.22 10.66 1.43 16.01 39 ” 9.67 10.96 1.37 14.76 40 ” 9.96 11.08 1.12 11.61 [6.73 Ave: 41 1 hour 8.80 10.60 1.70 19.93 42 ” 8.76 10.49 1.73 20.38 43 ” 8.93 10.63 1.70 19.66 44 ” 8.99 10.77 1.78 20.44 46 ” 9.04 10.63 1.69 18.16 46 ' ” 9.08 10.76 1.68 19.09 47 ” 9.14 11.09 1.96 22.01 48 ” 9.33 11.18 1.86 20.46 49 ” 9.66 11.30 1.64 17.62 60 ” 9.98 11.80 1.82 18.82 l9.64 Ave 44 Absorption data for (3” X 1 TABLE NO. 2 X 7%”) tangential ponderosa pine samples treated with water repellent (A). Treatment Weight of Weight of Percent sample before sample after absorption absorption treatment treatment in grams based on the bone dry weight 1 16 seconds 12.86 13.93 8.67 2 ” 13.37 14.66 9.18 3 ” 13.66 14.80 9.62 4 ” 14.23 16.11 6.38 6 ” 14.66 16.69 7.32 6 ” 16.19 16.38 8.08 7 ” 14.26 16.38 8.10 8 ” 14.42 16.64 8.02 9 ” 14.60 16.76 8.13 0 ” 14.78 16.90 7.82 . 8712' 1 minute 13.16 14.30 9.03 ” 13.44 14.78 10.29 ” 13.68 14.92 10.18 ” 14.43 16.66 7.87 ” - 14.80 16.86 7.39 ” 16.33 16.92 10.71 ” 14.27 16.47 8.68 ” 14.42 16.82 10.02 ” 14.64 16.86 8.46 ” 14.74 16.88 7.98 9.06 3 minutes 13.26 14.68 10.27 ” 13.46 14.91 11.12 ” 13.60 14.89 9.79 ” 14.46 16.69 8.14 ” 14.81 16.01 8.71 ” 16.73 17.31 10.37 ” 14.34 16.81 10.68 ” 14.48 16.93 10.33 ” 14.66 16.03 9.64 ” 14.83 16.26 9.88 9.88 30 minutes 13.29 14.83 11.96 ” 13.49 16.29 13.77 ” 13.68 16.66 14.93 ” 14.62 16.06 10.96 ” 16.40 16.96 10.39 ” 16.96 17.89 12.66 ” 14.36 16.06 12.30 ” 14.66 16.43 13.26 ” 14.73 16.41 11.77 ” 14.89 17.00 14.62 12.66 1 hour 13.34 16.46 2.12 16.40 ” 13.61 16.46 1.96 14.90 ” 13.76 16.91 2.16 16.13 ” 14.66 16.47 1.82 12.82 ” 16.34 18.41 2.07 13.08 ” 16.00 18.00 2.00 12.90 ” 14.39 16.33 1.94 13.92 ” 14.69 16.47 1.88 13.30 ” 14.76 16.66 1.80 12.69 ” 14.96 16.84 1.88 12.97 13.90 TABLE NO. 3 Absorption data for ( ” X 11”X%”) wood samples treated with water repellent (A). Sample Treatment Weight of Weight of Net Percent No. time sample before sample after absorption absorption treatment treatment in grams based on the bone dry weighgé 1 16 seconds 17.27 18.89 1.64 9.69 2 ” 17.76 19.22 1.47 8.66 3 ” 18.01 19.67 1.66 8.94 4 ” 18.84 20.28 1.44 7.89 6 ” 19.02 20.62 1.60 8.06 6 ” 19.32 20.67 1.36 7.21 7 ” 19.69 20.80 1.21 6.38 8 ” 19.76 20.87 1.12 6.86 9 ” 19.91 21.26 1.34 6.96 10 ” 20.18 21.66 1.47 _7___6__2_ Ave: 7.70 11 ' 1 minute 17.28 19.13 1.86 11.06 12 ” 17. 89 19.60 1.71 9. 86 13 ” 18.23 20.02 1.79 10.14 14 ” 18.93 20.82 1.89 10. 31 16 ” 19.07 20.79 1.72 9.31 16 ” 19.36 21.09 1.73 9.22 17 ” 19.63 21.16 1.62 7.99 18 ” 19.79 21.40 1.61 8.39 19 ” 20. 02 21.40 1.38 7.11 20 ” 20.34 _ 21.74 1.40 7.10 Ave: - ’ 9.06 21 3 minutes 17.46 14.92 1.96 11.68 22 ” 17.92 19.80 1.88 10.83 23 ” 18.66 20.61 1.96 10.86 24 ” 18.96 20.90 1.94 10. 66 26 ” 19.16 21.22 2.06 11. 09 26 ” 19.43 21.38 1.96 10. 36 27 ” 19. 67 21.28 1.61 8. 46 28 ” 19.83 21.30 1.47 7. 83 29 ” 20.03 21.69 1.66 8.04 30 ” 20.39 21.94 1.66 7.84 Ave: ‘ 9.74 31 30 minutes 17.67 19.87 2.30 13.60 32 ” 17.94 20.21 2.27 12.73 33 ” 18.73 21.18 2.46 13.60 34 ” 18.98 21.39 2.41 13.10 36 ” 19.22 21.47 2.26 12.08 36 ” 19.63 21.93 2.40 12.68 37 ” 19. 66 21.78 2.12 11.13 38 ” 19.86 22.26 2.41 12.63 39 ” 20.12 22.16 2.04 10.46 40 ” 20. 60 22.83 2.33 11.73 Ave: 12.34 41 1 hour 17.71 20.68 2.97 17.31 42 ” 17.98 20.83 2.86 16.36 43 ” 18.83 21.32 2.49 13.64 44 ” 19.02 21.72 2.70 14.66 46 ” 19.27 21.62 2.26 12.06 46 ” 19. 67 21.92 2.36 12.39 47 ” 19.72 22. 03 2.31 12.09 48 ” 19. 91 22.14 2.23 11.66 49 ” ~ 20. 10 22. 61 2.41 12.37 60 ” 21. 62 24.19 2.67 12.81 Ave 13.62 46 Absorption data for (6” X 1— TABLE NO. 4 X :5”) tangential ponderosa pine samples treated with water repellent (A). Treatment Weight of Weight of Percent sample before sample after absorption absorption treatment treatment in grams based on the bone dry weight 1 16 seconds 21.36 23.13 1.77 8.66 2 ” 22.28 24.00 1.72 7.97 3 ” 23.00 24.79 1.79 8.03 4 ” 23.67 26.20 1.63 6.67 6 ” 24.02 26.66 1.63 7.00 6 ” 26.07 26.68 1.61 6.63 7 ” 26.80 27.66 1.76 7.00 8 ” 26.12 27.68 1.66 61.16 9 ” 26.80 28.64 1.74 6.70 0 , ” 27.32 28.92 1.60 6.04 ° : ‘ 7 O7 1 minute 21.79 23.84 2.06 9.70 ” 22.91 26.04 2.13 9.69 ” 23.46 26.46 2.00 8.80 ” 23.71 26.20 1.49 6.49 ” 26.34 26.43 g 2.09 8.86 ” 26.16 27.16 2.01 8.26 ” 26.82 27.98 2.16 8.63 ” 26.17 28.14 1.97 7.77 ” 26.93 28.86 2.02 7.74 ” 27.71 29.61 1.80 6.73 8.26 3 minutes 21.84 24.12 2.28 10.78 ” 22.97 26.09 2.12 9.62 ” 23.44 26.63 2.09 9.20 ” 23.79 26.10 2.31 10.02 ” 24.40 26.72 2.32 9.81 ” 26.26 27.69 2.44 9.97 ” 26.98 28.13 2.16 8.64 ” 26.27 28.66 2.28 8.96 ” 27.00 29.23 2.23 8.62 ” 27.86 30.10 2.26 8.34 9.37 30 minutes 21.97 26.16 3.18 14.94 ” 23.20 26.60 3.40 16.12 ” 23.48 26.61 3.03 13.32 ” 23.89 27.41 3.62 16.21 ” 24.66 27.81 3.24 13.66 ” 26.66 28.47 2.92 11.79 ” 26.06 29.32 3.26 12.91 ” 26.41 29.48 3.07 12.00 ” 27.07 30.08 3.01 11.48 ” 28.08 31.27 3.19 11.72 13.22 1 hour 22.06 26.99 3.94 18.44 ” 23.28 26.63 3.26 14.41 ” 23.63 26.96 3.32 14.60 ” 23.91 27.16 3.26 14.03 ” 24.62 28.69 3.97 16.64 ” 26.67 29.33 3.66 14.72 ” 26.06 29.90 3.84 16.21 ” 26.61 30.00 3.49 13.69 ” 27.19 30.62 3.33 12.64 ” 27.83 31.34 3.61 13.01 Absorption data for (2” X 17%;” X $7”) tangential ponderosa pine samples treated with water repellent (13). TABLE NO. 5 Sample Treatment Weight of Weight of Net Percent No. time sample before sample after absorption absorption treatment treatment in grams based on the bone dry weight 1 16 seconds 8.66 10.09 1.66 18.71 2 ” 8.86 10.17 1.32 16.38 3 ” 8.94 9.80 0.86 9.71 4 ” 9.00 10.16 1.16 13.30 6 ” 9.06 10.07 1.02 11.63 6 ” 9.10 10.16 1.06 11.90 7 ” 9.19 10.30 1.11 12.47 8 ” 9.46 10.62 1.07 11.68 9 ” 9.78 10.84 1.06 11.18 10 ” 10.09 11.63 1.64 16.76 Ave: 13.17 11 1 minute 8.70 9.81 1.11 13.17 12 ” 8.89 10.28 1.39 16.14 13 ” 8.96 10.01 1.06 12.10 14 ” 9.01 9.98 0.97 11.11 16 ” 9.06 10.28 1.22 13.89 16 ” 9.10 10.23 1.13 12.81‘ 17 ” 9.18 10.26 1.08 12.13 18 ” 9.49 10.62 1.03 11.20 19 ” 9.89 10.90 1.01 10.64 20 ” 8.72 10.74 2.02 23.91 Ave' 13.70 21 3 minutes 8.90 10.30 1.40 16.24 22 ” 8.91 10.06 1.16 13.17 23 ” 8.98 10.21 1.23 14.09 24 ” 9.02 10.27 1.26 14.30 26 ” 9.07 10.19 1.12 12.74 26 ” 9.11 10.39 1.28 14.60 27 ” 9.22 10.62 1.30 14.66 28 ” 9.68 10.64 1.06 11.42 29 ” 9.96 11.96 2.01 20.86 30 ” 10.26 11.77 1.61 16.19 Ave: 14.70 31 30 minutes 8.86 10.26 1.40 16.32 32 ” 8.94 10.28 1.34 16.47 33 ” 8.92 10.23 1.31 16.16 34 ” 8.99 10.33 1.34 16.38 36 ” 9.04 10.42 1.38 16.76 36 ” 9.08 10.41 1.33 16.11 37 ” 9.13 10.68 1.66 17.06 38 ” 9.21 10.72 1.61 16.93 39 ” 9.67 10.98 1.31 13.98 40 ” 9.97 11.24 1.27 13.16 Ave 16.43 41 1 hour 8.63 10.26 1.62 19.38 42 ” 8.78 10.66 1.88 22.09 43 ” 8.93 10.91 1.98 22.89 44 ” 9.00 11.08 2.08 23.82 46 ” 9.04 10.76 1.72 19.63 46 ” 9.08 10.67 1.69 18.07 47 ” 9.17 10.73 1.66 17.66 48 ” 9.36 11.12 1.76 19.40 49 ” 9.66 11.13 1.47 16.70 60 ” 9.99 11.90 1.91 19.73 Ave: 19.86 48 Absorption data for (3” X 11%” X TABLE NO. 6 £357”) tangential ponderosa pine sample treated with water repellent (B). Treatment Weight of Weight of Percent sample before sample after absorption absorption treatment treatment in grams based on the bone dry weight 1 16 seconds 13.07 14.26 1.18 9.32 2 ” 13.40 14.63 1.23 9.48 3 ” 13.66 14.73 1.18 8.99 4 ” 14.34 16.34 1.00 7.19 6 ” 14.73 16.84 1.11 7.78 6 ” ' 16.19 16.46 1.27 8.63 7 ” 14.26 16.46 1.20 8.68 8 ” 14.42 16.63 1.11 7.94 9 ” 14.62 16.77 1.16 8.12 10 ” 14.79 16.74 0.96 6.63 8.28 1 minute 13.18 14.62 1. 10. 49 ” 13.44 14.82 1. 10. 60 ” 13.69 16.03 1. 10. 93 ” 14.49 16.67 1. 8.40 ” 14. 82 16.90 1. 7. 62 ” 16. 66 17.20 1. 10. 88 ” 14.32 16.43 1. 8.00 ” 14.44 16.73 1. 9.22 ” 14. 66 16. 86 1. 8.46 ” 14. 82 16. 13 1. 9.12 9.36 3 minutes 13.27 14. 92 1. 12.83 ” 13.47 16.02 1. 11.88 ” 13.67 16. 32 1. 12.46 ” 14. 60 16.79 1. 8.64 ” 14. 49 16.16 1. 8.13 ” 16. 77 17.43 1. 10. 86 ” 14. 34 16.81 1. 10. 68 ” 14. 62 16.86 10 9. 62 ” 1'4. 70 16. 32 1. 11.38 ” 14.87 16. 29 1. 9. 86 10.60 30 minutes 13.31 14.86 1. 12.02 ” 13.60 16.36 1. 13.81 ” 13.73 16.41 1. 12.63 ” 14.64 16.21 1. 11.06 ” 16.44 17.03 1. 10.63 ” 16.97 17.78 1. 11.70 ” 14.36 16.28 1. 13.91 ” 14.68 16.37 1. 12.67 ” 14.74 16. 66 1. 13.38 ” 14.93 16.71 1. 12. 30 12.41 1 hour 13.34 16.03 1.69 13. 07 ” 13.63 16.73 2.20 16.78 ” 13.80 16.83 2.03 16.18 ” 14.66 16.66 1.91 13. 46 ” 16.13 16.97 1.84 12.66 ” 16.14 18.26 2.12 13.66 ” 14.40 16.66 2.16 16.48 ” 14. 69 16. 69 2.10 14. 86 ” 14.77 16. 86 2.08 14. 64 ” 14.98 16. 91 1.93 13. 29 14.27 Absorption data for (4” X 1:l-”X TABLE NO. 7 3%”) tangential ponderosa pine samples treated with water repellent (B). Sample Treatment Weight of Weight of Net Percent No. time sample before sample after absorption absorption treatment treatment in grams based on the bone dry weight 1 16 seconds 17.27 18.91 1.64 9.80 2 ” 17.36 19.47 1.62 9.36 3 ” 18.09 19.77 1.68 9.68 4 ” 18.84 20.62 1.68 9.20 6 ” 19.06 20.49 1.43 7.74 6 ” 19.34 20.80 1.46 7.79 7 ” 19.61 21.02 1.41 7.42 8 ” 19.76 21.01 1.26 6.63 9 ” 20.00 21.34 1.34 6.91 10 ” 20.26 21.96 1.70 8.66 Ave‘ 8.30 11 1 minute 17.36 19.26 1.91 11.36 12 ” 17.87 19.76 1.88 10.86 13 ” 18.29 20.30 2.01 11.34 14 ” 19.07 20.73 1.66 8. 98 16 ” 19.14 21.06 1.91 10. 30 16 ” 19.43 20.90 1.47 7.81 17 ” 19. 63 21.21 1.68 8.31 18 ” 19.74 21.32 1.68 8. 26 19 ” 20. 03 21.62 1.49 7. 68 2O ” 20.37 22.26 1.88 9. 67 Ave: 9.44 21 3 minutes 17.49 19.63 2.14 12.62 22 ” 17.92 19.84 1.92 11. 06 23 ” 18.68 20.39 1.71 9. 46 24 ” 18.96 20. 99 2.03 11. 06 26 ” 19.20 20. 93 1.73 9. 30 26 ” 19.60 21.41 1.91 10.11 27 ” 19.68 21.31 1.63 8.66 28 ” 19.84 21. 48 1.64 8. 63 29 ” 20.11 22.12 2.01 10. 31 30 ” 20. 66 22.46 1.90 9. 64 Ave' 10.05 31 30 minutes 17.61 19.86 2.24 13.13 32 ” 17.98 20. 46 2.47 14.18 33 ” 18.79 21. 02 2.23 12.26 34 ” 18.97 21.70 2.73 14.86 36 ” 19.27 21. 40 2.13 11.41 36 ” 19.66 21.73 2.18 11.61 37 ” 19. 67 22.12 2.46 12. 86 38 ” 19.89 22.22 2.33 12.09 39 ” 20.14 22.16 2.02 10. 36 40 ” 20.64 22.71 1.63 8.19 Ave: 12.08 41 1 hour 17.74 20. 36 2.61 16.18 42 ” 18.01 20. 69 2.68 16.36 43 ” 18.83 21. 36 2.62 13.81 44 ” 19.02 21.64 2.62 14.22 46 ” 19.29 21.68 2.39 12.79 46 ” 19.69 21. 84 2.26 11.86 47 ” 19.76 21.99 2.24 11.70 48 ” 19.94 22.11 2.17 11.23 49 ” 20.18 22.36 2.17 11.10 60 ” 20. 66 23.11 2.46 12.29 Ave‘ 12.96 60 TABLE NO. 8 Absorption data for (6” X 1%” X :35”) tangential ponderosa pine samples treated with water repellent (B). Sample Treatment Weight of Weight of Net Percent No. time sample before sample after absorption absorption treatment treatment in grams based on the ‘ bone dry_ weight 1 16 seconds 21.38 23.20 1.82 8.78 2 ” 22.68 24.33 1.66 7.61 3 ” 23.37 24.97 1.60 7.06 4 ” 23.70 26.48 1.78 7.76 6 ” 24.02 26.97 1.96 8.38 6 ” 26.13 26.60 1.47 6.04 7 ” 26.86 27.66 1.80 7.19 8 ” 26.17 27.93 1.76 6.94 9 ” 26.88 28.64 1.76 6.76 10 ” 27.67 29.47 1.90 7.11 Ave: 7.36 11 1 minute 21.84 23.72 1.88 8.88 12 ” 22.91 24.98 2.07 9.32 13 ” 23.46 26.38 1.92 8.46 14 ” 23.72 26.60 1.88 8.18 16 ” 24.36 26.36 2.00 8.47 16 ” 26.24 27.14 1.90 7.77 17 ” 26.90 27.92 2.02 8.06 18 ” 26.28 28.36 2.08 8.17 19 ” 26.96 29.06 2.11 8.08 20 ” 27.68 29.64 1.96 7.31 Ave 8.27 21 3 minutes 21.93 24.16 2.23 10.49 22 ” 22.99 26.39 2.40 10.77 23 ” 23.47 26.68 2.21 9.71 _ 24 ” 23.81 26.99 2.18 9.46 26 ” 24.66 27.11 2.66 10.71 26 ” 26.47 27.63 2.16 8.76 27 ” 26.98 28.43 2.46 9.73 28 ” 26.31 28.60 2.19 8.69 29 ” 27.03 29.24 2.21 8.44 30 ” 28.14 20.44 2.30 8.43 Ave: 9.61 31 30 minutes 22.88 26.06 2.18 9.83 32 ” 23.26 26.91 2.66 11.76 33 ” 23.61 26.31 2.80 12.29 34 ” 23.91 26.90 2.99 12.90 36 ” 24.60 27.80 3.20 13.42 36 ” 26.63 28.43 2.80 11.27 37 ” 26.06 29.18 3.12 12.36 38 ” 26.46 29.61 3.06 11.94 39 ” 27.10 29.79 2.69 10.24 40 ” 28.94 31.69 2.66 9.46 Ave: 11.66 41 1 hour 22.07 26.33 3.26 16.24 42 ” 23.28 26.20 2.92 12.94 43 ” 23.66 26.61 2.86 12.48 44 ” 23.97 27.09 3.12 13.43 46 ” 24.73 27.71 2.98 12.44 46 ” g 26.76 28.31 2.66 10.26 47 ” 26.07 29.19 3.12 12.36 48 ” 26.62 30.29 3.67 14.23 49 ” 27.21 30.60 3.29 12.48 60 ” 23.66 26.68 2.92 12.73 Ave: 12.86 61 62 TABLE .NO. 9 Data showing the effect of Specific gravity on the percent absorption for (3” x 133;” x 4”) tangential ponderosa pine samples treated with water repellent B). Specific gravity range 0.3863 to 0.4128 Simple Weight of Weight of Net Percent No. sample before sample after absorption absorption treatment treatment in grams based on the bong dry geight 1 14.00 15.83 1.83 13.48 2 14.07 16.01 1.94 14.23 3 14.08 16.27 2.19 16.06 4 14.13 15.95 1.82 13.29 5 14.14 16.25 2.11 15.40 6 14.16 16.40 2.24 16.33 7 14.21 16.15 1.94 14.09 8 14.29 16.49 2.20 15.88 9 14.31 16.07 1.76 12.69 10 14.39 16.19 1.80 12.91 11 14.42 16.57 2.15 15.39 12 14.46 16.51 2.05 14.63 13 14.52 16.66 2.14 15.21 14 14.52 16.55 2.03 14.43 15 14.54 16.30 1.76 12.49 16 14.54 16.39 1.85 13.13 17 14.55 16.72 2.17 15.39 18 14.56 16.36 1.80 12.76 19 14.59 16.70 2.11 14.92 20 14.60 16.85 2.25 15.90 21 14.60 16.69 2.09 14.77 22 14.65 16.70 2.05 14.44 23 14.65 16.61 1.96 13.80 24 14.69 16.67 1.98 13.91 25 14.70 16.61 1.91 13.41 26 14.75 16.67. 2.20 15.40 27 14.76 16.61 1.84 12.87 28 14.78 16.95 2.25 15.71 29 14.79 16.60 2.18 15.21 30 14.80 17.03 2.12 14.78 31 14.80 16.97 ‘ 2.23 15.55 32 14.81 16.76 1.95 13.59 33 14.82 16.90 2.08 14.48 34 14.84 17.03 2.19 15.23 35 14.92 17.00 2.08 14.38 36 14.95 16.77 1.82 12.56 37 14.97 16.94 1.97 13.59 38 14.98 17.01 2.03 13.98 39 14.98 16.94 1.96 13.50 11$ 14.99 16.91 1.92 13.22 £86: 14732 63 TABLE NO. 10 Data showing the effect of Specific gravity on the percent absorption of (3” x 1%” x 3”) tangential ponderosa pine samples treated by dipping for 10 minutes in water repellent (B). Specific gravity range 0.4128 to 0.4404 Sample Weight of Weight of - Net FT Percent No. sample before sample after absorption absorption treatment treatment in grams based on the bone dry weight 1 15.00 17.00 2.00 18.76 2 15.02 17.20 2.18 14.98 3 15.02 16.97 1.95 13.40 4 15.04 16.93 1.89 12.97 5 15.05 16.96 1.91 13.10 6 -~ 15.09 16.96 1.87 12.74 7 15.09 17.40 2.31 15.80 8 15.09 17.30 2.21 15.12 9 15.10 17.04 1.94 13.26 10 15.11 16.93 1.82 12.43 11 15.14 17.50 2.36 16.09 12 15.15 16.98 1.83 12.46 13 15.16 17.28 2.12 14.43 14 15.16 17.19 2.13 13.82 15 15.19 17.19 2.00 13.59 16 15.21 17.38 2.17 14.72 17 15.21 16.84 1.63 11.06 18 15.25 17.13 1.88 12.72 19. 15.26 17.10 1.84 12.44 20 15.31 17.56 2.25 15.16 21 15.32 17.40 ' 2.08 14.02 22 15.33 17.23 1.90 12.79 23 15.34 17.47 2.13 14.33 24 15.35 17.48 2.13 14.32 25 15.36 17.44 2.08 13.98 26 15.36 17.06 1.70 11.42 27 15.38 17.18 1.80 12.08 28 15.39 17.47 2.08 13.95 29 15.41 17.62 2.21 14.80 30 15.41 17.51 2.10 14.06 31 15.41 17121 1.80 12.06 32 15.44 17.65 2.21 14.77 33 15.44 17.56 2.12 14.17 34 15.45 17.51 2.06 13.76 35 15.47 17.60 2.13 14.21 54 TABLE NO. 10 (cont.) Sample Weight of Weight of Net Percent No. sample before sample after absorption absorption treatment treatment in grams based on the A bone drj weight 36 16.47 17.77 2.30 16.34 37 16.48 17.77 2.29 16.27 38 16.49 17.68 2.19 14.69 39 16.49 17.69 2.20 14.66 40 16.60 17.68 2.18 14.61 41 16.60 17.71 2.21 14.71 42 16.60 17.64 2.14 14.26 - 43 16.61 17.37 1.86 12.38 44 16.61 17.74 2.23 14.84 46 16.67 17.72 2.16 14.26 46 16.68 17.37 1.79 11.86 47 16.68 17.64 1.96 14.98 48 16.59 17.66 2.07 13.70 49 16.69 17.71 2.12 14.03 60 16.69 17.76 2.17 14.36 61 16.60 17.72 2.12 14.02 62 16.60 17.61 1.91 12.36 63 16.61 17.38 1.77 11.71 64 16.61 17.44 1.83 12.10 66 16.61 17.43 1.82 12.04 66 16.63 17.67 2.04 . 13.47 67 16.64 17.82 2.18 14.38 68 16.66 17.84 2.18 14.37 69 16.67 17.82 2.16 14.16 60 16.70 17.76 2.06 13.48 61 16.72 17.69 1.97 12.93 62 16.74 17.74 2.00 13.11 63 16.74 17.64 1.90 12.46 64 16.74 17.86 2.11 13.84 66 16.76 17.69 1.84 12.06 66 16.76 17.69 1.84 12.06 67 16.76 18.02 2.27 14.46 68 16.76 18.06 2.30 16.06 69 16.76 17.72 1.96 12.84 70 16.78 18.01 2.23 14.68 71 16.81 17.92 2.11 13.77 72 16.81 17.93 2.12 13.84 73 16.82 17.61 1.69 11.02 74 16.86 17.81 1.96 12.76 76 16.87 18.09 2.14 13.91 76 16.87 17.74 1.87 12.16 77 16.88 17.87 1.99 12.93 56 TABLE NO. 10 (cont.) Sample ' Weight of Weight of Net Percent—T No. sample before sample after absorption absorption treatment treatment in grams based on the -1..- bone dr weiht 78 16.89 17.71 1.82 11.82 79 16.90 17.97 2.07 13.43 80 16.90 18.02 2.12 13.76 81 16.92 18:03 2.11 13.67 82 16.92 18.03 2.11 13.67' 83 16.93 18.14 2.21 14.31 84 16.93 18.17 2.24 14.61 86 16.93 17.99 2.06 13.34 86 16.94 18.24 2.30 14.90 87 16.96 17.72 1.76 11.38 88 16.97 18.31 2.34 16.13 89 16.97 17.73 1.76 11.38 90 16.98 18.14 2.16 13.96 Average: 13.67 66 TABLE NO. 11 Data showing the effect of specific gravity on the percent absorption of ( ” x 1%” x 3”) tangential ponderosa pine samples treated by dipping for 10 minutes in water repellent (B). Specific gravity range 0.4404 to 0.4679 Sample Weight of Weight of Net Percent No. sample before sample after absorption absorption treatment treatment in grams based on the WW 1 16.00 17.99 1.99 12.84 2 16.00 18.13 2.13 13.74 3 16.01 17.98 1.97 12.70 4 16.03 18.18 2.16 13.84 6 16.03 18.21 2.18 14.04 6 16.06 18.16 2.09 13.43 7 16.06 18.24 2.18 14.01 8 16.07 18.12 2.06 13.17 9 16.08 17.77 1.69 10.86 10 16.08 18.00 1.92 . 12.32 11 16.09 18.13 2.04 13.08 12 16.11 17.86 1.76 11.21 13 16.12 18.-29 2.17 13.89 14 16.13 17.86 1.72 11.00 16 16.16 17.97 1.82 11.63 16 16.18 17.84 1.66 10.69 17 16.21 18.02 1.81 11.62 18 16.22 17.92 1.70 10.81 19 16.23 18.02 1.79 11.38 20 16.24 18.32 2.08 13:21 21 16.24 18.37 2.13 13.63 22 16.26 18.06 1.80 11.43 23 16.26 18.67 2.41 16.30 24 16.26 18.22 1.96 12.44 26 16.29 18.24 1.96 16.49 ' 26 16.30 18.43 2.13 13.49 27 16.30 18.73 2.43 16.39 28 16.30 18.49 2.19 13.87 29 16.30 18.61 2.21 14.00 30 16.31 18.31 .'2.00 12.66 31 16.31 18.31 2.00 12.66 32 16.32 18.62 2.20 13.92 33 16.33 18.10 1.77 11.19 34 16.33 18.62 2.19 13.84 36 16.33 18.63 2.30 14.64 67 TABLE NO. 11 (cont.) Sample Weight of Weight of Net Percent N0. sample before sample after absorption absorption treatment treatment in grams based on the MW 36 16.33 18.33 2.00 12.64 37 16.36 18.62 2.17 13.70 38 16.36 18.46 2.10 13.26 39 16.36 18.62 2.26 14.26 40 16.36 18.63 2.17 13.69 41 16.36 18.49 2.13 13.44 42 16.37 18.41 2.04 12.86 43 16.38 18.36 1.98. 12.48 44 16.38 18.61 2.23 14.06 46 16.39 18.41 2.02 12.72 46 16.40 18.66 2.16 13.69 47 16.40 18.73 2.33 14.66 48 16.40 17.77 1.37 8.62 49 16.40 18.69 2.29 14.41 60 16.41 18.80 2.39 16.03 61 16.41 18.46 2.04 12.83 62 16.41 ' 18.64 2.23 14.02 63 16.42 18.63 2.11 13.26 64 16.42 18.73 2.31 14.62 66 16.42 18.42 2.00 12.67 66 16.43 18.60 2.07 . 13.00 67 16.43 18.69 2.26 14.20 68 16.43 18.79 2.36 14.82 69 16.46 18.67 2.12 13.30 60 16.46 18.64 2.18 13.67 61 16.46 18.76 2.29 14.36 62 16.46 18.64 2.08 13.04 63 16.46 ' 18.03 1.67 9.84 64 16.48 18.66 2.07 12.96 66 16.61 18.60 1.99 12.44 66 16.63 18.66 2.13 13.30 67 16.64 18.66 2.12 13.23 68 16.69 18.76 2.17 13.60 69 16.61 18.63 1.92 11.93 70 16.61 18.02 1.41 8.76 71 16.61 18.46 1.84 11.44 72 16.61 18.62 2.01 12.49 73 16.66 18.84 2.19 13.68 74 ' 16.67 19.17 2.60 16.48 76 16.68 18.78 2.10 13.00 76 16.68 18.83 2.16 13.30 77 16.69 18.87 2.28 14.10 TABLE NO. 11 (cont.) 68 Sample Weight of Weight of Net Percent No. sample before sample after absorption absorption _ treatment treatment in grams based on the bone dry weight 78 16.72 19.08 2.36 14.67 79 16.74 19.62 2.78 17.14 80 16.74 18.83 2.09 12.88 81 16.74 18.99 2.26 13.87 82 16.78 18.96 2.17 13.34 83 16.82 19.09 2.27 13.93 84 16.86 19.16 2.29 14.01 86 16.87 19.06 2.18 13.33 86 16.87 19.14 2.27 13.88 87 16.88 19.23 2.36 14.36 88 16.88 18.72 1.84 11.26 89 16.89 18.98 2.09 12.77 90 16.89 19.20 2.31 14.11 91 16.90 18.94 1.74 10.62 92 16.91 19.33 2.42 14.77 93 16.96 19.37 2.42 14.74 94 16.97 19.18 ' 2.21 13.44 Average: 13.17 Vfi t 59 TABLE NO. 12 Data showing the effect of specific gravity on the percent absorption of (3” x 1%” x 5”) tangential ponderosa pine samples treated by dipping for 10 minutes in water repellent (B). Specific gravity range 0.4679 to 0.4964 3ample Weight of Weight of T Net Percent No. sample before sample after absorption absorption treatment treatment in grams based on the bone dry weight 1 17.06 18.43 1.37 8.29 2 17.07 19.29 2.22 13.42 3 17.10- 19.36 2.26 13.64 4 17.12 19.33 2.21 13.32 5 17.18 19.50 2.32 13.93 6 17.18 19.23 2.06 12.31 7 17.20 19.48 2.28 13.68 8 17.20 19.74 2.64 16.24 9 17.33 19.61 2.28 13.58 10 17.38 19.63 2.25 13.36 11 17.39 18.73 1.34 7.96 12 17.42 19.73 2.31 13.68 13 17.62 19.90 2.38 14.02 14 17.68 ' 19.73 2.16 12.62 15 17.59 19.91 2.32 13.62 16 17.66 19.92 2.26 13.21 17 17.70 19.83 2.13 12.42 18 17.75 19.82 2.07 12.03 19 17.75 19.91 2.16 12.66 20 17.78 19.87 2.09 12.13 21 17.82 19.92 2.10 12.16 22 17.83 20.12 2.29 13.25 23 17.83 19.91 2.08 12.04 24 17.84 20.13 2.29 13.24 25 17.85 20.11 2.26 13.06 26 17.93 20.13 2.20 12.66 27 17.94 20.12 2.18 12.54 28 17.96 20L06 2.10 12.07 17.99 20.31 2.32 18.31 Average V 3 12.71? Average Dimension Change of Untreated Tangential Ponderosa TABLE NO. 13 Pine Control Samples. 60 Immersion time Average Dimensional Change in Thousands of an Inch in water hours : minutes (2”Xl-é-"Xé-n) (3”X1%”X%”) (4,,X1%,,X%”\) (5”Xl'é-"X—é‘”) 0:16 0:30 0:46 1:00 1:16 1:30 1:46 2:00 :16 :30 :46 :00 :16 :30 :46 :00 :16 :30 :46 :00 :16 :30 :00 mmmmehmmwwwwmmm 26 32 34 37 40 42 44 45 46 48 48 51 61 52 63 54 55 55 56 56 56 57 58 28 36 39 42 43 44 46 47 49 5O 51 52 53 54 54 55 55 56 56 56 57 57 57 34 41 46 49 51 53 56 66 57 58 59 6O 6O 61 62 62 '63 63 64 66 65 66 66 4O 48 53 56 58 6O 62 63 66 65 66 67 68 68 68 69 69 7O 70 7O 7O 71 71 W 61 Ne me H6 m6 we 00 u 0 H14 Nv mm N6 ow oo " m ow NH. ow N6 5. om " m HH. NH. mm Huv mm on n m mm H6 mm 0.6 m6 mH “ m cm H4 mm 06. mm mH " m em 06 mm ow .34 00 u 9 mm ow mm mm em 00 n m mm am pm mm 3. m6 “ 4 mm mm Hum um mm m4 " H4 mm mm mm mm Nw om u H. mm em mm mm mm om " H4 «m mm «m em. H6. 3 u H. mm mm Hm mm «m mH " H4 mm mm mm mm mm 00 n 6 mm 6m om 4m mm 00 n H. Nm 4m Nm em mm 3. u m Nm 4m NN Nm Hm 3.. u m om Nm om mm mm cm a m cm Nm sN cm on om " m N Hm mN Hm mm 3 u m N om mN NN mN mH " m N om mN om Nm 00 u m N NN «N N N 00 u m N N am. mN Hm me u N N N NN N N me n N N N 1N sN mN om “ N NN mN HN N «N om " N HN N N N NN mH " N ON NN NH HN HN mH " N ON 6N NN N N 00 u N NH HN NH NH ON 00 n N 5H mN NN NN N me u H sH NH 5H NH NH 3» u H 3 HN NH HN mN om “ H 16H 5 HvH mH mH om " H 4H NH >H NH HN mH “ H NH mH NH 6H 6H mH " H NH 3 HVH 0H NH 00“ H m NH 3 HH NH 00 u H 0H 16H NH «.H 0H m6 " o m 0H m. m 2 m4 " o N. . HH 3 NH mH om “ o w s m N. m om " o m m m m 0H NH u o 4 m m m m mH " 0 0m om m H H4 H monsfifiumnsom 0m 0m m H H4 H mopsfiaumnsom A3 5355 E Eofimmon A3 6.6338 E “commence .8nt E 663 qu.m.HmESH .8nt E 663 qumnoSmmH ) mOZH Z6. mo magi.» mUZH z< .mO mama? mambomB 5 H050 ZH EB émDOmE ZH mUZSwO ZH “HEB 454205ng m0¢mm>< 29mg dZOHmZmE/HHQ m0< 29mm; a: M Me .656 66.366 611.6: a :6 6.2 1136.866 3 92.3695 map; E magma. mmqgm sz 6.605986 $6252.49 no 5245 dwzoazflfio 56.694 .3. .oz "334m. 1 “at?“ 62 N6 66 6N NN NN OO " N NN O6 ON ON HN OO " N H6 N6 NN 6N NN ON " N N_N NN ON NN HN ON " N O6 N6 NN NN HN NH “ N NN NN NN NN ON NH u N NN H6 NN NN ON OO " N NN N_N NN N_N NN OO. N N NN NN HN ON N6 u 6 6N NN N.N N_N NN N6. . 6 NN NN ON ON NN ON ".6 NN NN NLN NN N_N ON. . 6 6N NLN NN NN N_N NH " 6 NN 6N NN NN N_N NH “ 6 NN NN NN NN NN OO “ 6 .HN NN NN 6N NN . OO " 6 NN 6N NN NN 6N N6 " N ON NN 6N NN NN N6 " N .NN NN NN NN NN ON a N NN HN NN NN 6N ON ".N NN ON 6N NN NN NH " N NN NN NN HN NN NH 0 N NN NN NN NN HN OO " N NN NN HN HN NN OO ".N 6N NN HN HN NH N6 ” N NN NN ON NH ON N6 " N NN 6N NH NH NH ON a N . 6N NN NH NH NH ON " N HN HN N.H NH N.H NH H N NN NN NH N.H NH NH " N NH NH NH NH NH 00 u N ON HN NH NH N_H OO 0 N NH N.H NH 6H 6H N6 u H NH ON 6H 6H NH N6 " H NH 6H HH NH NH ON " H NH N.H NH NH 6H ON u.H NH NH N HH HH NH " H 6H NH NH HH NH NH " H OH OH N. N N OO u. H HH NH OH N OH OO u H N N N N. N. N6 n O OH OH N N. N N6 “ O N N 6 N N ON " O N. N. N. N N ON 0 O 6 N N N N NH " O N 6 N N 6 NH " O ON ON . . ON N H 6 H moEEEnmEom 3V moEEE E EoHHoHHmH . A3 mmEEE E EmHHmth .8nt E oEE qumthEH .683 E 6E6. noEmHmEEH. . HHOZH Z¢ m0 . .mNHHHEw mOZH 2.6. m0 MHMHBHNB mnHZANNDOWB ZH WON/HSmHO 2H MHZHB NENDOHHB ZH “NEED ZH HHZHB 12w ZOHmZmHHZHQ m0< - - ZOHNMHWSHSHH EZOHNZEZHQ MU¢E¢ - ZOHmma/HHN/HH. 1 21m N1:1mH N :Nv .mEN 268% :m. M :mH N :6u .mEN mHmem 3 quqmamm mamas meg» gimme 636266 Em «mommozom 65.2 554m. mo Hugo Ezofizmefio 14.6%... 6 H .oz 592. 63 NN NN NN NN NLN 00 u N NN NN N.N NN NN OO " N NN 6N NN 6N NN ON " N NN N.N NN NN NN ON n N ON NN NN NN 6N NH u N NN NN 6N 6N NN NH u N ON NN 6N NN 6N OO " N 6N 6N NN NN 6N OO " N NN ON NN ON NN N6 “ 6 NN 6N NN NN NN N6 " 6 N.N ON NN NN HN ON n 6 NN NN HN ON NN ON " 6 NN NN HN NN HN NH u 6 ON HN ON ON NN NH 0 6 NN NN ON NN ON OO u 6 NN ON NN NN HN OO ” 6 NN N.N NN N.N NN N6 u N NN NN NN NN ON N6 " N NN NN N.N NN N.N ON u N NN N.N NN NN NN ON " N NN 6N NN 6N NN NH " N NN NN NN NN N.N NH u N HN 6N 6N NN 6N OO " N NN NN 6N 6N NN OO " N ON NN NN NN NN N6 " N NN NN NN NN 6N N6 ” N NH ON NN HN NN ON n N ON HN HN HN NN ON “ N NH NH ON ON HN NH u N NH ON ON ON NN NH u N NH N.H N_H NH ON 00 u N N.H NH N.H NH ON OO " N NH NH NH NH NH N6 0 H NH NH NH N.H NH N6 " H NH NH 6H NH NH ON u H 6H NH 6H NH NH ON 0 H NH HH NH NH 6H NH u H NH 6H NH 6H NH NH u H OH OH HH NH NH 00 u H OH NH HH NH NH 00 u H N N N N HH N6 n O N OH N OH OH N6 n O N N N N N ON " O N. N N. N. N ON n O 6 6 N N N NH " O N N N N N NH “ O on o . . ..:_., -ol .- .O _ 1.1115311111311415... - .1...=._A-ou ch mmEEE E EmHHmmmn Amy mmEEE E 33.3th “ENE E 0E» qumHmEEH .6me E 01E“ aonnmEEH + M05 24 MO @9216 MOZH a mo MWB¢f 1 ZOHE H¢f ZOMINWHSHSHH “M. N tNWH M th wNHMH mHmHHHNm bamlx :mé N 2 w 01N1HMLWHQ§W Amv Emflmmmm MERE meg magma magm ”MN/Hm «MOMMHQZOnH §m0Z¢H .mO H050 iZOHmZMH/HHQ m04 NH .02 Egg”. 64 L NN ON NN NN NN NN NN NN NN N.N NN NN 6N NN NN 6N NN NN ON NN ON HN NH ON NH NH N.H NH NH NH NH NH NH NH NH NH OH OH N N N N. N N 6 6 ON ON Hmc mBHEE E EwHHommu N.N N.N NN NN 6N NN NN HN ON NH NH N.H NH NH 6H NH HH OH N N N N N N H N.N NN NN NN 6N NN NN HN ON NH NH N.H NH 6H NH NH 1"" NC‘OLOFCDODH 6\H .853 E 0E“ nEmnmEmHH NOZH Z4 nHO NQZANNDOHHH. ZH M050 .HHNZOMINZEAHQ m0¢mm>6w NIW PNH 00 ON NH " 00" N6 " ON " NH " OO u N6 u ON " NNNNN6666DLONN NH 00 L0 VF ONHN NHMN OOHN N6nH ONHH NHHH OO"H N6HO ONHO NHHO meEEumEom 11mme¢B 1 2H BEE onmmEE1 NLNDH N 213 .mNHm mHmn—Hmm NN NN 6N 6N NN NN HN ON NH NH NH N.H NH 6H 6H NH HH 0 COLOQOCDCDH ON .HBMB E QEN nonnmEEH 6N NN NN HN HN ON NH NH N.H N.H NH NH 6H NH NH HH OH N N N N 6 N ON NN NN NN 6N 6N NN HN HN ON NH NH N.H NH NH 6H NH NH N NNNNNS NN NN NN 6N 6N NN NN HN ON NH NH N.H NH NH NH NH H N6Nb—NN;_‘*_4 NN OO N NN ON u N NN NH " N N.N OO N NN N6 6 NN ON 6 6N NH 6 NN OO 6 NN N6 N HN ON N ON NH u N NH OO ” N NH N6 u N N.H ON " N NH NH " N 6H OO " N NH N6 ” H HH ON " H OH NH " H N OO " H N N6 .H O 6 ON ” O N NH " O 6\H mmEEENwEom and mmEEE E E8233 NENDONB ZH "M050 iZOHNZmam m0¢ 1 m. M:Q.NHN 66 .mE mHmEm mUZH 7H< .mO allHHN N.N Egmmmm mafia EH3 magma @963 E HEB 206mg magm ”mag < N.H .OZ BER. . TABLE NO. 18 . AVERAGE WATER REPELLENT EFFICIENCY OF TANGENTIAL PONDERO SA. a M X %97) PETE SAMPLES TREATED WITH WATER REPELLENT (A). PERCENTEFETCIENCY i J ple Size: j3” x 1 Sam MRSICN l5 3 m j X PERCENT EFFICIENCY ize: 12” x 1 IMMERSION Eample OF . WATER REPELLENT (A) TIMEIN OF WATER REPELLENT TIMEIN (E WATER WATER O 46“” ‘64—) Egg .58 (D aim 331 0+4 .figfi (D 89 EH E H U) .93 ,"J E .51 03 B O :11 34mg 0’0) EH ng SE (D 65.1» 2154: 81." (D 86 En w \ H (O B :1 5. 23! U) S O m CwObN dQWQQNQQQQ mb-va—ICOLQLooom mmmmm66666 9669669699 OQDCOCOLONs—IOL‘LQ @66666666003 NWQQQWQQQQ NOQHNGCDLflmcom mmmm6N6666 NOEQQfiQ‘QOEQ‘Q. NNNNNNHNNN LDV‘V‘V‘V‘WV‘C‘OO’DOO 71.4 71.4 71.4 82.1 66.7 72.2 69.5 80.6 60.5 69.2 60.5 74.4 61.9 66.7 61.9 71.4 55.8 60.5 55.8 67.5 52.3 56.8. 52.3 65.9 REEOQQQLQEW‘Qd NNODCDELOQO) 66NNNNNN 64.3 58.3 . 59.0 , 57.2 51.2 I>LQ 66 15 30 45 00 15 .30 45 00 15 30 45 00 15 30 45 00 15 30 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 . 3 3 4 4 4 NNNNQ>6ODNOHH6NN66 ECOLOOCCSHOCD OFLKSNOSCDCOCC; (Ob-EFCOQDCOLQ md‘fl'fl‘mmmm LQv-‘IO’DNODQZHNLQGOCDL‘. CDCSC'SND- mDHdLQbV'N LDKDLOKDV‘V‘V‘V‘O’DO’DUDC’QOO QfiQQ“ (Db-Etoto @NQQQNNQNNNQQfiNQQQ OHQOML‘CDHOQDCO NHCDELQO’DOCDI’.‘ wwL‘ECOCDCOCOLOLO «310666660300 Ma OGDGOOl-QV‘G SV‘OGDODC’SNOSCDV‘O‘SN CDL‘EL‘CO MLQKD mfi‘fl‘fl‘fl‘mmmmmm QQQQQQfiQNdedNQQWNQQ OIOOL‘LONCDLO (DEECOCDCOLQLQ NCDODLDNHCDQDCOLQO'J LOV'V‘V‘V‘V‘C‘OCOCOO’DOQ 15 30 45 00 15 30 45 00 15 30 45 00 1 5 00 45 00 1 5 30 45 00 0 O 0 1. 1 1 1 2 2 2 ,2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 65 29.8 33.3 28.1 31.6 26.3 29.8 26.3 29.8 21.1 17.6 15 30 6 : 00 28.6 35.7 26.8 30.4 28.1.33.3 26.3 28.1 32.2 31.6 24.6 28.1 24.6 26.3 15.8 27.6 34.5 27.6 29.3 31.0 6:00 66 0.00 0.00 H.00 0.00 0.00 00 u 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 u 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 H.00 0.00 00 u 0 H.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 u 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 0H " 0 0.00 0.H0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0H “ 0 0.00 0.H0 0.00 0.00 0.50 00 u 0 0.00 H.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 u 0 0.50 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.50 00 u 0 0.00 5.00 0.50 0.50 0.00 00 u 0 0.00 5.00 0.50 0.50 0.00 00 u 0 0.50 0.00 0.50 5.00 0.50 00 n 0 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0H u 0 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.50 0H u 0 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 u 0 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.H0 5.00 00 u 0 0.00 0.00 0.H0 0.H0 5.00 00 u 0 5.H0 0.00 0.H0 0.00 5.00 00 u 0 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 u 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 00 u 0 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.50 0H " 0 0.00 5.H0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0H " 0 0.H0 0.00 0.50 5.00 5.00 00 u 0 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 n 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.H5 00 u 0 5.50 0.00 H..00 0.50 H.00 00 u 0 0.00 H.00 0.05 0.05 0.05 00 u 0 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50 00 u 0 5.50 5.50 0.05 0.05 . 0.05 0H " 0 0.H0 0.00 0.00 0.05 . 0.00 0H u 0 0.H5 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.05 00 u 0 0.00 0.00 0.H5 0.05 0.00 00 u 0 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 00 u H 0.50 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.05 .00 u H 0.05 5.05 5.H0 0.00 0.05 00 u H 0.00 0.00. 0.05 0.55 0.05 00 u H 0.55 0.05 0.00 0.H0 0.H0 0H 0 H 0.05 5.00 0.05 0.05 0.05 0H " H 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 00.H H 0.55 0.05 0.05 0.H0 0.05 00 u H 0.00 0.00 5.00 . 0.00 0.00 00 u 0 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 u 0 0.50 0.50 5.H0 0.00 0.50 00 u 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 u 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0H u 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.H0 0.00 0H u 0 00 00 0 H 0\ H mmudfiauwhsom 00 00 0 H 0\ H mwfigfifinmgom mmgfifi E 20 EmHHQOH .833 5 was. nonnmEEH 00 2.543% mama? 5102 B2 m0 mmm BZmH p0“ N RMH N omma mafia E m2? 205mg :9 55 295m .3 quqmmmm $.28 mg gammy magm mam «mommnzom 439252.49 mo woonEmm Egmmmm mE>>>l>l>l>l>© .QQQ‘YTO‘EQR‘Q‘Q‘Q HOOP .QQQ‘YTQQ‘Yfi‘Q“. OOOOECOLQNNOCDFQO COGDD‘EEED-L‘COCOCO LOOLQOLOODQDCOLOHCO NODQCOV‘C’DNHCIDCOLOV‘CONO 0300000000 (DCDCDbL‘L‘bLND-b OLQO3NOWN©GowszbN Ob-V‘N 030000 (I) NCDOE Hm HNNCDWODNfl‘OCDC‘QOWr-{COOQCO V‘OODEUDV‘HOODFCOLOOONNHODCD (DODCDQCDQCDCDFL‘FL‘L‘PD-ECCO NmovamwmebomHmbH r-ICDL‘C‘ONr-ICOCDLOV‘Nr-IOQDCOCOCOLQ ammmmmbbbb-EEECOKDCOCOCO HNND—WOOCONHQEOQHNHH vocammmooowav—domcocommmm cacaoooooooooovb-bbb-bcococococococo Hovmomo0HommmbmmHomm mmw>>>>>000000000 HWOV‘MOCDCDQOVHCO (DEEL‘L‘L‘QOCOQOCOCO EQLQQQLQOOEL‘BFVQ V‘HOCOfi‘QODb-OCDCDBLNLD 62.3 69.6 65.2 68.1 60.9 68.1 63.8. 65.2' 68.1 FWN HOCdmmNHOQESCOUS oaoooooooooooobhbvbbcococococo 68 22222 v'NcNOO cococococo 02‘19902 NHOOO) «3:023:00 22229 L‘l-QVHNN cococococo 0.“.020‘202 ObLNLoE c0000 “2'2“?“2‘1 00024-20 cococococo OLOOLOO end‘Os—Ico <4 000 ddde wmmu—q cocococo 2222 L~L~co~d4 cocococo @229 moor-40 cocococo @299 HO coco . “1": LQLO 000 OLOOLDO COV‘IOHC‘Q 212*000 53.5 62.0 57.8 59.2 62.0 6:00 60.6 60.6 63.6 60.6 56.1 6:00 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES 3 1293 03085 5153