List,

Remember that I am not timber framer so be gentle on me but I’ll ask anyway.

Over on the General Forum there is a discussion regarding the checking and splitting of cut ends and how and what you should treat it with. My question is does anyone have knowledge of a practice of treating ends of timbers in old barns?

In all of the Dutch barns I have looked at there would seem to be no evidence of this practice and I have seen very little bad effects from splitting and checking. I have seen a few, very few anchorbeam tenons where the wedge has split out the relish. In those cases I would have attributed it to racking of the barn frame more than anything else.

Anyone got any facts or theories about this in old barns?

Rolland

Hi Roland:
Well here is my input on this topic--as far as I know there was no type of perservative used by the early carpenters (we have nicknamed them timberframers) of this part of the world, and I speak for where I live here in Ontario. About the only thing that they had was linseed oil, and White lead, which was the main ingredient of the early paint mixtures. I have examined many early frameworks, and none exhibit a coating whatsoever on the ends or otherwise. In frameworks the ends of the timbers, in the majority of cases are concealed, and examination of ends is almost imposible. From looking at the sides of the timber's hewn surfaces, the lateral cracking was the norm, and didn't really cause a failure in its supporting power or longevity. Tenons did check laterally, but if the mortise is properly constructed to receive the tenon, it is virtually impossible for the wood pins to tear through the ends, causing joint failure.
House frames were constructed similar to barn as far as hewing and shaping the mortise and tenons. At times where the ceiling timbers are exposed and beaded on the corners, they would check laterally and nothing would prevent that from happening.
It is my opinion that the harvesting date of the timbers to be used was mid winter around these parts, and that meant that the timbers had the least amount of moisture in them, meaning less checking, and of course less dry rot in members enclosed quickly after construction was completed.
NH

Rolland,

It's likely very little end sealing was done in historic frames, with little ill effect. Today, however, house-frame timbers are subjected to quicker drying times due to modern heating systems and living conditions. Also, timbers from today's smaller, quicker-grown trees contain more juvenile wood which reacts poorly to these conditions, resulting in highly-stressed timbers with more warpage and checking. End-sealing isn't a cure-all, but will have a beneficial effect in slowing drying times and evening out moisture exchange rates between side-grain and end-grain.

Of course, wood species vary greatly in stability and amount of checking. The old-timers were more likely to choose based on that fact, where today we're more likely to consider esthetics, cost and availability.

Leon Buckwalter

Gentlemen,

Thanks for the replies on checking and splitting. All of the reasons that you stated were ones that I was thinking but hey, you never know. I also asked among some other Dutch barn people (who are mostly documenters) and got basically the same answers. None had ever seen any evidence of any type of sealer on ends.

If any was ever used it would most likely still be visible on tenons in blind mortises and I have never seen any on the Dutch barns that I have documented that were being taken down.

Once more thanks for the help.

Rolland