Initial visual conclusions of firstly sanding and then staining a redwood fence board with Woodrich Stain and Seal(wc).
Sanding:
Board layout consists of 5 sections from left to right- rough sawn,600 grit,320grit,120 grit,60 grit.
Sanding was done with orbital on lowest setting.
The 4 sanding grits expectedly produced various feel and look. Sheen/glaze mainly upon the grain lines/formations increased as grit level increased and the
higher grits of 320 and 600 showed sheen/glaze actually within the grain.
Main thing of note is that half centimeter swirl pattern sanding marks can be seen in the 60 grit from almost 3 feet away and it's roughness makes the
section darker at an angle or straight on view before staining compared to the other grits.
SANDED-UNSTAINED: Left to right; rough sawn, 600,320,120,60 grits
SANDED SHEEN:
VIEW FROM RIGHT OF 60 GRIT:
Stain application:
Board was placed on an ever so slight tilt in order to log any running of the product.
I used hypodermic without needle to lay a 10ml puddle to center of each test section.
After about 3 minutes I spread each section out with an artist brush.
STAINED:
Should be said before going on that shading= darkening of color and tinting= brightening of color (color value)
Rough sawn-
Stained darker initially by far in its given placement area than anything sanded as it does not run prior to brushing-aka holds oils/pigments where it is put.
The pigments shade (rather than tint) the grain lines and the splintering raised areas. Has its own uniqueness compared to all sanded sections. I would want
to spray in order to get even coverage as the oils and pigments penetrate quiker into and hold onto one area and hence does not allow much spreading after very short time frame. I assume it would use more staining product with some application methods as is normally mentioned on product coverage rate infos.
Some may think this section got better penetration and is of higher quality... but I view it similar to looking into a wet can of stain and it is more optical illusion than anything. All sections have same amount of stain in them and none absorbed more than another. Yea perhaps one could keep feeding one section more than another but who does that with a one coat product and why would we want to when all the pictures below show as dark enough.?
ROUGH SAWN:
--the next sections are in backwards order compared to the board layout..sorry--
60 grit-
Product oil/solvent ran and the amount that ran was same as 120 grit but more than 320 or 600 grit. Pigment and resin seemed to settle/dive a tad quiker than
the other 3 grits to point of less solids available for spreading at about a 3 minute mark.There may have actally been just as much carrier as the other
sections when I went to spread it but it didn't flow the goodies.
Upon staining the visability of the sanding scratches decreased to about 1 foot. Color evenness is far less than the rough sawn or the other grits.The very
minimal sheen/glaze imparted to the grain from sanding produced both shading and highlight tinting to the grain making for a very undesirable look compared
to rough sawn or the other grits.In fact in the very center of the stain application it can be seen that the grain is tinted and but areas where I spread the
product to the grain lines became shaded as in the rough sawn.While looking at the board at angle from over 6 feet away this section shows a fur/velvet/almost moldy look
from the sanding. IMHO it is rather ugly/muddy compared to any other section. I did not expect the rough sawn to look so good innitially compared to this 60 grit. All the
higher grits show as brighter which naturally means toward orange..could be the black of the pigment stays more to the surface via filtration, or the section
is darker before staining than the others, or a combination.The very right edge black streaks should be ignored at some level as I didn't go deep
enough.Staining lower section would have looked better judging by the unstained 'view from right' pic above.
60 GRIT:
120 grit-
Frankly everything about this section is better than the 60 grit section and not so fickle. Product did run though about same as 60 grit. It has some color unevenness, and but
spread/backbrushed better than the 60 grit.The increased sheen/glaze still presents a dual situation of some grain line areas showing both shade and
tinting.
At both close and long range this section does not present the fur/velvet look at either an angle or straight on. Color evenness/blotchyness is noticably
better at angle but still presents a fair amount if viewing straight on.
120 GRIT:
320 grit-
This grit still presents an ever so slight color unevenness viewed straight on but is very acceptable. The sheen/glaze level does away totally with shading
to the grain (tints it) and does much to trick the eye into not seeing the slightly imperfect color distribution. At angle this section is wonderful and very
similar to the 120 grit.
320 GRIT:
600 grit-
This grit is interesting.
Everything about this section is initially better than the lesser grits. Evenness is noticably better than the 320 grit but product spread about same. The tinted grain
is just a hair brighter than the 320. The increased sheen/glaze from sanding apparently caused if anything an increase in surface tension to the product and
ran less than everything but the rough sawn but not all that much different from the other grits really. In doing a hair dryer heat test to all the sections
at about 30 minutes when visably dry and no surface wetness it could be seen that there is a direct open conduit for the product to travel in and out on the 600 and 320.. more so than the lower grits even though the higher grits are more glazed and would seem more closed off. The 600 seemed to come up at quiker rate and higher
volume than the 320 as example.The pathway I assume is cleaner to traffic in cases of temperature changes. Immediately after heat was removed the wood cooled
and acted as a sponge to absorb the product back in between the large grain which is btw less sheened. I don't necessarily believe the oils/solvents went deeper
on the 120, 60, and rough sawn but that the lack of sheen allowed the evaporatives to evap away quiker during the 30 min of drying. In other words it may be that the
sheen/glaze lets liquid through more readily than say an air or evaporation action.
Whether product went deeper on one section compared to another remains to be seen if I rip the board. Honestly I don't expect to be able to see pigment depth
differences upon cutting but perhaps the oils could be spotted.
600 GRIT:
All sections were dry on surface before I heated with hair dryer to demonstrate the spongy nature of stain through high grit sanded areas. This pic of the
600 grit section is right after a first cooling..the stain sucked right back in:
This pic is a 2nd quik reheating moments later. It demonstrates that what came out the first time did not dry off but rather went back in. Went back in fast
compared to the initial application I might add. It's like once the initial surface tension is overcome by time or mechanical back brushing it is a free ride
on in and out for the oil least in regards to heating and cooling anyway or until cured:
My initial conclusion upon staining is that both rough spots/splinters and the thin unglazed grain lines(sugary sections) allow or promote pigment to
attach to its surface and but the sanding/glazing of it does the opposite. The glazing of the grain line areas starting at or above 120 grit is a good thing
if you want to highlight/tint the grain and it may actually prevent wear patterning from hand or foot traffic since it is already clear via such sanding
prep and they are the peaks that stick up and first meet abrasive forces...for most part there is no thick top coating that will prevent wear compared to interior work that gets a good top coat poly, etc.. Purpousfully heat glazing of whole board on and within
the grain would likely not be a good thing and limit decent penetration/absorbtion to the point of an unstained surface.The 600 grit did not do such on this
softwood at all,.. it was perfect with plenty of darkness equal to that of the 320 and 120. On the 60 grit sanded section I have to contribute its overall darker look so far to the fact that its canvas is darker to begin with and not to idea of there being much if any absorbtion difference. Remember it also has a higher percentage of shaded grain compared to the tinted grain and such tricks the eye. In looking within the grain it is not far if at all different than the 600 level. No sections had enough sugars or heat burnishing inside the grain areas to
cause an issue or hamper things. If anything the glaze on the higher grits acted as a control and even minded dispersant not all that different than a sanding sealer used on interior work.
I think that different hardness or density of wood would mimmick the grit steps and resultant quiknesses of penetration or dispersion perhaps to the point of a 120 grit being equal to maybe even the 600 grit results or better.Temperature during application is likely to mimmick grit
step is my feeling. A different product's quality/formula is even more likely to mimmick a grit step maybe even to a point of 3 grit steps. A junk product
over a 120 gritted hardwood may equal that of a heat glaze situation allowing hardly anything in.
The amount of product I used resulted in no readily seen surface coating or resin with any of the sections. Remember all sections got same amounts.The 600 feels best and looks best and but the 120 is almost
borderline in feel for my tastes. Yes I can feel the difference even though the wood has a stain and sealer applied.For practical purposes of being able to spread/backbrush product following a spray application something above 60 would be
best or give more time. If I can't be somewhere smoother and more even looking than the 60 grit due to labour, etc. than I would prefure to be under 60 to gain a more even
velvet/fur/matte look. Back brushing would then likely be a non-factor too. If wood is even softer/less dense than this redwood that goal perhaps could be satisfied naturally and 60 would be perfect. I just
know I don't want to be in the middle between finer finish and rough finish and need to be one way or the other of the 60 grit results found here..120-150 grit
seems most likely grits to ensure keeping on the highside considering the multiple variables of wood hardness and product choices and maybe 40 grit to keep
to the matte side of things..Unsure though that I would care for 40 though using my orbital. Maybe a 40 grit scratch pattern would be more tolerable with the
belt sander going with the grain.The 60 grit scratch pattern was acceptable enough after staining with this product.
I'll probably stick with 80 or better
and hope for harder wood than this though as the 60 just doesn't look very good. I not suggesting everyone go out and do same cause if these little test
sectons were blown up to large scale size of a deck I am sure things will look much more even then what I see.
UPDATE: After half day dry time..
Rough sawn section looks pretty bad with way too much shading to the thin sugary grain lines. Again, compared to sanded, the grain presents as a 180 degree flip of
what gets dark and what gets bright/tinted. Is trickery of sort as the grain is now no darker than other sections as it begins to dry and cure. (refer back to where I said it is an optical illusion of looking into wet can of stain or oil). If anything at angle from a half room away in bright light it looks the lightest of the 5 sections.Things could
be different come daylight.
The next section, the 600 grit section, looks the darkest most opaque at angle I assume due to its color evenness of the pigments. This applies in bright
room light or darker light. In darker room both the tinted grain line and its adjacent hairline shade line of the 600 grain is well defined. Yes with fine wood work ther eis multiple lines to each grain line with some going bright(tinted) and its partner going darker (shaded).However, in viewing straight
on in bright room light the 320 grit has gained serious ground on the 600 in both color evenness and overall darkness.. haha..
The 120 presents nothing special to note beyond it's fair amount of blotchyness and the 60 grit looks just as bad in any light or angle. So far the 600 takes
more marks but the 320 may win in daylight.
Final outcome is going to have to wait a couple weeks for things to finally settle but I'll snap a few straight on pics and edge view pics later on tomorrow..
Update 3/22/08:
..yup by daylight and some more drying things look much better and less differences betwen all the sanded sections..the 60grit might even be passable.. :)
Initial visual conclusions of firstly sanding and then staining a redwood fence board with Woodrich Stain and Seal(wc).
Sanding:
Board layout consists of 5 sections from left to right- rough sawn,600 grit,320grit,120 grit,60 grit.
Sanding was done with orbital on lowest setting.
The 4 sanding grits expectedly produced various feel and look. Sheen/glaze mainly upon the grain lines/formations increased as grit level increased and the
higher grits of 320 and 600 showed sheen/glaze actually within the grain.
Main thing of note is that half centimeter swirl pattern sanding marks can be seen in the 60 grit from almost 3 feet away and it's roughness makes the
section darker at an angle or straight on view before staining compared to the other grits.
SANDED-UNSTAINED: Left to right; rough sawn, 600,320,120,60 grits
SANDED SHEEN:
VIEW FROM RIGHT OF 60 GRIT:
Stain application:
Board was placed on an ever so slight tilt in order to log any running of the product.
I used hypodermic without needle to lay a 10ml puddle to center of each test section.
After about 3 minutes I spread each section out with an artist brush.
STAINED:
Should be said before going on that shading= darkening of color and tinting= brightening of color (color value)
Rough sawn-
Stained darker initially by far in its given placement area than anything sanded as it does not run prior to brushing-aka holds oils/pigments where it is put.
The pigments shade (rather than tint) the grain lines and the splintering raised areas. Has its own uniqueness compared to all sanded sections. I would want
to spray in order to get even coverage as the oils and pigments penetrate quiker into and hold onto one area and hence does not allow much spreading after very short time frame. I assume it would use more staining product with some application methods as is normally mentioned on product coverage rate infos.
Some may think this section got better penetration and is of higher quality... but I view it similar to looking into a wet can of stain and it is more optical illusion than anything. All sections have same amount of stain in them and none absorbed more than another. Yea perhaps one could keep feeding one section more than another but who does that with a one coat product and why would we want to when all the pictures below show as dark enough.?
ROUGH SAWN:
--the next sections are in backwards order compared to the board layout..sorry--
60 grit-
Product oil/solvent ran and the amount that ran was same as 120 grit but more than 320 or 600 grit. Pigment and resin seemed to settle/dive a tad quiker than
the other 3 grits to point of less solids available for spreading at about a 3 minute mark.There may have actally been just as much carrier as the other
sections when I went to spread it but it didn't flow the goodies.
Upon staining the visability of the sanding scratches decreased to about 1 foot. Color evenness is far less than the rough sawn or the other grits.The very
minimal sheen/glaze imparted to the grain from sanding produced both shading and highlight tinting to the grain making for a very undesirable look compared
to rough sawn or the other grits.In fact in the very center of the stain application it can be seen that the grain is tinted and but areas where I spread the
product to the grain lines became shaded as in the rough sawn.While looking at the board at angle from over 6 feet away this section shows a fur/velvet/almost moldy look
from the sanding. IMHO it is rather ugly/muddy compared to any other section. I did not expect the rough sawn to look so good innitially compared to this 60 grit. All the
higher grits show as brighter which naturally means toward orange..could be the black of the pigment stays more to the surface via filtration, or the section
is darker before staining than the others, or a combination.The very right edge black streaks should be ignored at some level as I didn't go deep
enough.Staining lower section would have looked better judging by the unstained 'view from right' pic above.
60 GRIT:
120 grit-
Frankly everything about this section is better than the 60 grit section and not so fickle. Product did run though about same as 60 grit. It has some color unevenness, and but
spread/backbrushed better than the 60 grit.The increased sheen/glaze still presents a dual situation of some grain line areas showing both shade and
tinting.
At both close and long range this section does not present the fur/velvet look at either an angle or straight on. Color evenness/blotchyness is noticably
better at angle but still presents a fair amount if viewing straight on.
120 GRIT:
320 grit-
This grit still presents an ever so slight color unevenness viewed straight on but is very acceptable. The sheen/glaze level does away totally with shading
to the grain (tints it) and does much to trick the eye into not seeing the slightly imperfect color distribution. At angle this section is wonderful and very
similar to the 120 grit.
320 GRIT:
600 grit-
This grit is interesting.
Everything about this section is initially better than the lesser grits. Evenness is noticably better than the 320 grit but product spread about same. The tinted grain
is just a hair brighter than the 320. The increased sheen/glaze from sanding apparently caused if anything an increase in surface tension to the product and
ran less than everything but the rough sawn but not all that much different from the other grits really. In doing a hair dryer heat test to all the sections
at about 30 minutes when visably dry and no surface wetness it could be seen that there is a direct open conduit for the product to travel in and out on the 600 and 320.. more so than the lower grits even though the higher grits are more glazed and would seem more closed off. The 600 seemed to come up at quiker rate and higher
volume than the 320 as example.The pathway I assume is cleaner to traffic in cases of temperature changes. Immediately after heat was removed the wood cooled
and acted as a sponge to absorb the product back in between the large grain which is btw less sheened. I don't necessarily believe the oils/solvents went deeper
on the 120, 60, and rough sawn but that the lack of sheen allowed the evaporatives to evap away quiker during the 30 min of drying. In other words it may be that the
sheen/glaze lets liquid through more readily than say an air or evaporation action.
Whether product went deeper on one section compared to another remains to be seen if I rip the board. Honestly I don't expect to be able to see pigment depth
differences upon cutting but perhaps the oils could be spotted.
600 GRIT:
All sections were dry on surface before I heated with hair dryer to demonstrate the spongy nature of stain through high grit sanded areas. This pic of the
600 grit section is right after a first cooling..the stain sucked right back in:
This pic is a 2nd quik reheating moments later. It demonstrates that what came out the first time did not dry off but rather went back in. Went back in fast
compared to the initial application I might add. It's like once the initial surface tension is overcome by time or mechanical back brushing it is a free ride
on in and out for the oil least in regards to heating and cooling anyway or until cured:
My initial conclusion upon staining is that both rough spots/splinters and the thin unglazed grain lines(sugary sections) allow or promote pigment to
attach to its surface and but the sanding/glazing of it does the opposite. The glazing of the grain line areas starting at or above 120 grit is a good thing
if you want to highlight/tint the grain and it may actually prevent wear patterning from hand or foot traffic since it is already clear via such sanding
prep and they are the peaks that stick up and first meet abrasive forces...for most part there is no thick top coating that will prevent wear compared to interior work that gets a good top coat poly, etc.. Purpousfully heat glazing of whole board on and within
the grain would likely not be a good thing and limit decent penetration/absorbtion to the point of an unstained surface.The 600 grit did not do such on this
softwood at all,.. it was perfect with plenty of darkness equal to that of the 320 and 120. On the 60 grit sanded section I have to contribute its overall darker look so far to the fact that its canvas is darker to begin with and not to idea of there being much if any absorbtion difference. Remember it also has a higher percentage of shaded grain compared to the tinted grain and such tricks the eye. In looking within the grain it is not far if at all different than the 600 level. No sections had enough sugars or heat burnishing inside the grain areas to
cause an issue or hamper things. If anything the glaze on the higher grits acted as a control and even minded dispersant not all that different than a sanding sealer used on interior work.
I think that different hardness or density of wood would mimmick the grit steps and resultant quiknesses of penetration or dispersion perhaps to the point of a 120 grit being equal to maybe even the 600 grit results or better.Temperature during application is likely to mimmick grit
step is my feeling. A different product's quality/formula is even more likely to mimmick a grit step maybe even to a point of 3 grit steps. A junk product
over a 120 gritted hardwood may equal that of a heat glaze situation allowing hardly anything in.
The amount of product I used resulted in no readily seen surface coating or resin with any of the sections. Remember all sections got same amounts.The 600 feels best and looks best and but the 120 is almost
borderline in feel for my tastes. Yes I can feel the difference even though the wood has a stain and sealer applied.For practical purposes of being able to spread/backbrush product following a spray application something above 60 would be
best or give more time. If I can't be somewhere smoother and more even looking than the 60 grit due to labour, etc. than I would prefure to be under 60 to gain a more even
velvet/fur/matte look. Back brushing would then likely be a non-factor too. If wood is even softer/less dense than this redwood that goal perhaps could be satisfied naturally and 60 would be perfect. I just
know I don't want to be in the middle between finer finish and rough finish and need to be one way or the other of the 60 grit results found here..120-150 grit
seems most likely grits to ensure keeping on the highside considering the multiple variables of wood hardness and product choices and maybe 40 grit to keep
to the matte side of things..Unsure though that I would care for 40 though using my orbital. Maybe a 40 grit scratch pattern would be more tolerable with the
belt sander going with the grain.The 60 grit scratch pattern was acceptable enough after staining with this product.
I'll probably stick with 80 or better
and hope for harder wood than this though as the 60 just doesn't look very good. I not suggesting everyone go out and do same cause if these little test
sectons were blown up to large scale size of a deck I am sure things will look much more even then what I see.
UPDATE: After half day dry time..
Rough sawn section looks pretty bad with way too much shading to the thin sugary grain lines. Again, compared to sanded, the grain presents as a 180 degree flip of
what gets dark and what gets bright/tinted. Is trickery of sort as the grain is now no darker than other sections as it begins to dry and cure. (refer back to where I said it is an optical illusion of looking into wet can of stain or oil). If anything at angle from a half room away in bright light it looks the lightest of the 5 sections.Things could
be different come daylight.
The next section, the 600 grit section, looks the darkest most opaque at angle I assume due to its color evenness of the pigments. This applies in bright
room light or darker light. In darker room both the tinted grain line and its adjacent hairline shade line of the 600 grain is well defined. Yes with fine wood work ther eis multiple lines to each grain line with some going bright(tinted) and its partner going darker (shaded).However, in viewing straight
on in bright room light the 320 grit has gained serious ground on the 600 in both color evenness and overall darkness.. haha..
The 120 presents nothing special to note beyond it's fair amount of blotchyness and the 60 grit looks just as bad in any light or angle. So far the 600 takes
more marks but the 320 may win in daylight.
Final outcome is going to have to wait a couple weeks for things to finally settle but I'll snap a few straight on pics and edge view pics later on tomorrow..
Update 3/22/08:
..yup by daylight and some more drying things look much better and less differences betwen all the sanded sections..the 60grit might even be passable.. :)
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites