Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: DNA vs Boiling green wood

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Delta, BC
    Posts
    64

    DNA vs Boiling green wood

    To follow up on a good discussion on DNA, I wonder about the pros and cons of boiling green wood. I'm trying to decide between the two on a large batch of maple, and wonder if boiling is more or less as reliable and if the drying time afterwards less or more?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    60
    I've never tried DNA, as it's hard to come by here in Canada, but I have done some boiling. The drying time is a little longer I find, but it definitely stabilizes crack prone wood...Ony beef I have with it, is that if you are dealling with highly figured wood with nice rays, the boiling seems to take some of the "flash" out of the wood.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Warren, MI
    Posts
    252
    "DNA vs Boiling Green".....sounds like a good football game!
    "Any man who can drive safely while kissing a pretty girl is simply not giving the kiss the attention it deserves"-Albert Einstein

  4. #4
    I look at the boiling as a solution for 'difficult' woods like madrone, or to you Canadians, arbutus. Maple is a stable wood, and easy to dry with minimal warping and cracking as long as usual safety measures are taken: round over the rims, seal, store in cool place out of sun and any wind. If the maple cures too slowly, you can get a lot of mold spots because they love the extra sugar in it. You do need a little ventilation with it. Boiling does mute and muddle colors a bit. Too much work for me, I like warped bowls...

    robo hippy

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Wetter Washington
    Posts
    888
    I agree with Robo, I never boil Maple, it's too well behaved, at least in our climate.
    Madrone on the other hand.... (just finished boiling my fourth load in as many days)

    I looked into DNA years ago, actually ended up talking to a forest products type that knew about DNA. He stated that the reason the industry doesn't use it is the unpredictably of the process. Some species it worked, some it didn't, some it did sometimes and not others. It also cost more then any other process.

    He also said he couldn't picture how LDD (Liquid Dish Detergent) could work.
    Making sawdust mostly, sometimes I get something else, but that is more by accident then design.

  6. #6
    LDD came into use through Ron Kent, specifically for dealing with Norfolk Island Pine. If you have ever tried to sand out any pine it really gums up the abrasives. With my once turned bowls, like the DNA soaking, it does nothing except make the woods a LOT easier to sand out. The DNA soak on once turned bowls make the wood harder to sand out. I have no idea why.

    robo hippy

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    lufkin tx
    Posts
    2,054
    Try wet sanding with soapy water on resinous woods and tropicals.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •