![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Preservation | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
Painting Your Historic Barn (or house) "OLE JIM" GALLAUDET COLLEGE Washington, D.C. Between the heavy timber framing on the second floor, the exterior wall is faced with tongue and groove siding made of Southern yellow pine. There are also ornamental "half-timbers" applied over the siding, resulting in horizontal ledges and angled pockets which have a tendency to catch and hold water. As early as 1910, the second floor wall surfaces were covered with stucco in an attempt to reduce water damage. The most dramatic aspect of the 1980 rehabilitation was the removal of the applied stucco and restoration of the painted half-timbered wooden exterior, much of it still intact (see figure 1). Old paint was removed down to bare wood and a new primer and two topcoats were ap-plied. However, the newly applied paint on the wooden surfaces started failing within a year. By 1984, with the paint blistering and peeling, the college realized that the entire exterior wooden surface once again needed major work.
Problem Paint peeling off the wooden surface indicated that the prime coat had not adequately bonded to the wood (see figure 2). A close inspection using a "cherry picker" revealed three areas of serious deterioration. First it was apparent that moisture was getting behind the "half-timbering" where it covered the tongue and groove siding, and was rotting the wood. Secondly, the joint where the recessed tongue and groove siding abutted the heavy timber posts and lintels was equally difficult to keep sealed once the paint had failed. And finally, extensive dry rot had occurred at the intersection of the structural column and sill plate (see figure 3). The extensive paint failure, together with the deteriorated wood, indicated a serious moisture problem. Paint Failure Based on the physical evidence and on an examination
of records from the 1980 work, it was possible to attribute the paint
failure to a combination of factors: excessive wall moisture, selection
of an incorrect paint system, and painting in cold weather (see figure
4).
During the 1980 restoration, a steam pipe had burst, saturating a large section of the exterior wooden wall in the gymnasium. Readings taken after the accident showed a moisture level in the wood as high as 43%. Apparently, the walls were not adequately dried out before batt insulation was installed and the wall surfaces painted, thereby contributing to the paint failure. The paint selected for the 1980 exterior work was a fire-retardant marine grade epoxy (pigmented polyamide epoxy). The paint had been chosen partly because it contained fire-retardant agents and was therefore consistent with the college's fire safety concerns. Local codes required safety fire-retardant coating on the interior wooden surfaces, and the local fire officials had recommended its application on the exterior as well. In addition, the paint was selected because it was supposed to help waterproof the exterior and seal the many troublesome wood joints. This impervious paint only compounded the problem. Residual moisture trapped in the walls from the broken steam line could not easily escape once the epoxy paint was applied. Furthermore, the paint turned out to be hygroscopic, or moisture absorbing, because of the salts used in the fire-retardant formulation. Once exposed to moisture, the paint swelled and, due to poor surface bonding, blistered off. Records also showed that the painting occurred during weather below 40'F, creating the possibility that the paint had frozen before drying or, at a minimum, that the prime coat had not properly bonded to the wood. As a result of all these factors, there was widespread paint failure, exposing bare wood to further water damage and ultra-violet degradation. The only way to solve the problem was to remove all the paint, properly
prepare the wood surface, and repaint.
Wood Deterioration The deterioration of the timber joints was from long-term decay probably
dating back to the turn of the century. Fortunately, the surfaces of the
structural timbers were in good condition; the rotted tenor pockets in
the structural members could be consolidated and filled with epoxy resins
rather than be replaced. About 10% of these timber joints were in need
of such repair.
Solution Repair and repainting was scheduled in the following order:
Carried out on a time and materials basis by the contractor, work started first on the more intricate front elevation. The College would be able to more accurately estimate the overall cost once work on the front elevation was completed. The scope of work could be modified for the less significant elevations if adequate funds were not available. Surface Preparation And Repainting Paint Removal The first step was to strip off the old paint. Heat plates were used even though it was very difficult to raise the temperature of the fire-retardant paint to the point where it could be scraped off without scorching the wood. Extreme care was taken; the work was carefully supervised and only workmen trained in this type of paint removal were employed. Work was scheduled to finish early in the day to allow at least three hours before the construction crew left the site, thereby providing time to detect any hidden smoldering of wood. (Smoke detectors wired to a caretaker's quarters or a central alarm are always a good back-up safety feature for any project involving thermal paint removal). No open flames were used on this job because of the high fire risks and the unavoidable damage they do to historic woodwork. Upon removing the paint, it was evident that the wood, saturated by moisture at the time of the 1980 restoration, had dried out naturally, and in some cases was excessively dried out due to ultra-violet degradation from exposure to sunlight. To protect the wood surfaces, once the paint was removed, the walls were draped with tarpaulins to shed rain water. No open flames were used ... because of high fire risks ... Priming After the old paint was stripped off, the wood surfaces
were sanded, generally on the same day. Orbital sanders with #120 grit
(medium grade) sandpaper were used on flat surfaces and flexible sanding
blocks on the curved jack rafters and in tight cor-ners. Moisture meter
readings were taken of the wood prior to priming to ensure that the moisture
content in the wood did not exceed a reading of 14%. As work progressed
the exposed wood was primed with an oil-alkyd primer cut by 20% with mineral
spirits. An oil-alkyd primer was selected for its good ability to bond
to wood surfaces. The primer was thinned with a solvent to increase the
depth of ... the extra depth of primer penetration helped to rejuvenate the dried wood ... Wood Repair and Replacement Repair or replacement of damaged wood was the next step. This phase involved epoxy consolidation and epoxy infill of damaged structural members and the selective replacement of moderately deteriorated trim and sills. When wood was replaced, primed redwood was used since today's yellow pine is less durable than the heartwood yellow pine originally used on the building. Approximately 20% of the applied decorative trim (diagonals and ogee boards) were replaced along with five panels of tongue and groove paneling (see figure 6). Good sections salvaged from the wood panels were reused for small repairs elsewhere on the building. When wood was consolidated and filled with epoxy resins, the strength of the epoxy fill was formulated to match the strength of the wood as closely as possible. The major areas of deterioration were mortise and tenon pockets of the vertical and horizontal structural members. With the surface wood of these members in generally good condition, only the punky areas of the beam or post had to be dug out. The remaining shell forming the tenon pocket was consolidated as a precaution to stop any future deterioration. The hollow was filled with epoxy resins to stabilize the joint. Prior to selecting epoxy consolidation as a means to repair structural members, the project team had taken into consideration the lack of consensus among professionals regarding the effectiveness of epoxy over the longterm. The natural wood fibers could continue to deteriorate behind the patch or adversely affect the area, possibly contributing to patch failure. However, while epoxies in this context have been in use probably less than 20 years, there does not appear to be serious problems if care is taken in formulating the fill material, surfaces are properly prepared, and the paint surface is maintained. The contractor, who was experienced in epoxy consolidation and repair, specially formulated the epoxy fill and primed both the epoxy treated wood and adjacent wood surfaces with an oil-alkyd primer. Based on his experience, the epoxy treated wood did not need special preparation other than priming and should hold the paint as well as the adjacent wood surfaces. Since the building owner is committed to a scheduled maintenance program, the potential problem was not considered serious. Second Priming As the repair work was completed, the wooden surfaces
were sanded lightly to remove any accumulated dirt, grease or dust, then
primed with a second coat of oil-alkyd primer at the full strength, tinted
slightly to ensure total coverage. The architect specified two prime coats
for the building both because of the need to undertake several weeks of
repair work following removal of the old paint and due to the history
of bad paint performance on the building.
Caulking and Applying Molding Strips With the wood repaired and
primed, the next step was to close the joints, seams and cracks on the
surfaces where water could penetrate the wall. Areas of particular concern
were the ledges on the horizontal beams or sill plates created by the
recessed wood panels and the crevices created by the diagonally applied
"half-timbered" trim. In the 1980 restoration, a cove molding had been added where the recessed panels abutted the structural posts and beams. The joints, however, were not caulked and water penetrated behind the molding once the paint began to fail. The architect for the remedial work developed a new detail using a combination of a 3/4" quarter-round piece of oak with a 1/4" x 3/16" pine backing (see figure 7). The new wood was back-primed and edge-grain primed prior to installation. The reason for the backing piece was to create a channel to receive a 1/4" bead of caulking/sealant. Without this channel, there was no guarantee that the sealant would hold firm. This detail should allow for an effective seal at the joint--a chronic source of water penetration over the years (see figure 8). The sealant selected for caulking was a long-lasting pre-mixed one-part polyurethane. This is a high-quality sealant applied with a caulking gun and is recommended for use on exterior wood. Areas caulked included open seams where horizontal and vertical boards intersected, joints around window openings, and along the new oak molding strips. The sealant takes paint very well after curing and should last at least as long as the paint. Painting Proper painting procedures were followed throughout the project.
The priming immediately after paint removal and then the repriming when
wood repairs were completed showed the strong emphasis placed on development
of a sound paint coating. Prior to applying the two top paint coats, the
semi-gloss finish left by the second priming was roughed up using sandpaper
and the surfaces were wiped down in order to remove any dust which had
accumulated.
Acrylic latex paint, with its good color stability, was selected for the two top coats primarily for its durability and "breathability" (see figure 9). Compatible with the manufacturer's oil-alkyd primer, the acrylic latex also has flexibility of movement. This is an important quality since wood naturally expands and contracts. Project Costs
Project Evaluation The project also shows the careful surface preparation that must be taken to ensure the proper bonding of paint to the wood as well as bonding between the different layers. Too often, considerable time and expense go into removing paint, but not enough time is put into surface preparation or proper application following manufacturer's recommendations. Then, too, there are frequent instances where inappropriate paints are used or an inferior quality is selected to cut costs. The results are the same--the necessity for more frequent repainting, serious paint failure or both. For "Ole Jim," a 7-year life is expected from the new paint job before repainting will be necessary. Under normal conditions, 7 years is the commonly recognized life span for paint applied to bare wood which has been properly prepared. Future repainting should be much easier and cheaper due to the addition of trim pieces and thorough caulking to eliminate pockets where water collected. The owner is committed to regular inspection of the building and the correction of any problems as soon as they are apparent (see figure 10). PROJECT DATA:
This PRESERVATION TECH NOTE was prepared by the National Park Service. Charles E. Fisher, Preservation Assistance Division, National Park Service serves as Technical Coordinator for the PRESERVATION TECH NOTES. Special thanks go to the project architect, Baird Smith, AIA, and the general contractor, Bryan Blundell, for their generous assistance in providing information concerning the work on "Ole Jim." The following Preservation Assistance Division staff contributed to the production of this Tech Note: Michael J. Auer, Brenda Siler, and Theresa Robinson, Historic Cover Photo: Courtesy of Callaudet College. PRESERVATION TECH NOTES are designed to provide practical information on practices and innovative techniques for successfully maintaining and preserving our cultural resources. All techniques and practices described herein conform to established National Park Service policies, procedures, and standards. This Tech Note was prepared pursuant to the National Historic Preservation Act Amendments of 1980 which directs the Secretary of the Interior to develop and make available to government agencies and individuals information concerning professional methods and techniques for the preservation of historic properties. Comments on the usefulness of this information are welcomed and should
be addressed to PRESERVATION TECH NOTES, Preservation Assistance Division-424,
National Park Service, P.O. Box 87127, Washington, D.C. 20013-7127. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
© 2002 New York
State Barn Coalition
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||