You will get plenty of advice on uk d-i-y, but another good scource is
http://periodproperty.co.uk/forum/viewforum.php?f=1
Mike P the 1st
> Is there any way that they can be stripped back to the original wood
> surface in situ without wrecking the surrounding ceiling?
Start simple - try samples with Nitromors, or with heat stripping. You
might be lucky and it might just work.
Best thing I've used for this is a Makita brush sander (like a 6" wide
rotary drum brush, made of sandpaper). 500 quid, but yoiu can hire
them.
Much depends on what they're covered with. Bituminous stuff is
horrible and I'd think seriously about either leaving them alone, or
having a gritblaster come in and do them for me.
Worth checking by hand sanding whether the coating goes to a powder or
gums up and sticks to the abrasive.
This kind of thing would be fast, and get you right to the edge, but
they do throw crap everywhere.
> http://www.tooled-up.com/Product.asp?PID=128130
Chemical removers might work but getting them to stick to overhead
surfaces might be a problem. Caustic types are effective on oil or
spirit based coatings, but won't touch synthetic varnishes like
polyurethane. They also seriously darken oak, but this can be easily
reversed with peroxide.
Normally done by some sort of sandblasting. Very laborious but
effective. It can be a diy job. The real work is cleaning up after.
Way to go. I've seen it done, great results, buy as Mike says its very
messy.... very!
--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
And, if possible mask up the ceiling with something fairly tough.
They can blast down to about 2-3inches resolution, maybe better if they
take the time., so that's how far the damage will extend, and it tends
to be mild pitting not total destruction. Even if the masking gets
ripped, its better than nothing.
These can make a decent job of it:
http://www.makitauk.com/index.php?catid=93&open=93&page=36
http://www.mtmc.co.uk/product.asp?cookiecheck=yes&numRecordPosition=2&P_ID=39589
They have a drum shaped brush (IIRC there used to be a range of them
depending on how aggressive you want to be)
http://www.tool-net.co.uk/p-333727
--
Cheers,
John.
/=================================================================\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\=================================================================/
It depends.
Builders will insist in sand-blasting beams to remove the old paint.
This is fine if you want to ruin everything inside the house and to
ensure that one will be eating sand in every meal for the next thirty
years.
I've found that gently wire brushing by hand produces the best results
but it is tedious work and will take several weeks to do.
Any mechanical means will cause damage to the beams and that seems a
shame.
>
> Normally done by some sort of sandblasting. Very laborious but
> effective. It can be a diy job. The real work is cleaning up after.
Completely shags the beams, it's the chosen method of morons.
As already pointed out, sand is not the only thing that can be blasted.
Nutshells can apparently create a baby's bum finish on woodwork.
Wire brushing by hand is the worst of both worlds- takes an age, and
looks crap when you've finished
But how close to the ceiling could you get? I imagine they're built like
a planer, which would leave the most difficult bit untouched.
And why would it do that oh wise one?
From what I have seen the brush goes close to the edge - but I am not
sure if it goes right to the edge (with a little splay out).
The remaining bit you could tart with a multimaster and carbide rasp
perhaps.
>Steve Firth wrote:
>> <er...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Normally done by some sort of sandblasting. Very laborious but
>>> effective. It can be a diy job. The real work is cleaning up after.
>>
>> Completely shags the beams, it's the chosen method of morons.
>
>And why would it do that oh wise one?
I was told that the finish will look sandblasted and that the beams
rain sand for a long time after.
Mike P the 1st
As might be expected if you blast it with sand :-)
However, there are many other types of blast media - baking soda, walnut
shells, corn cob, and a whole range of plastic beads.
How many of these are practical in your living room I'm not sure, but
blasting is not a method to be dismissed based on its traditional
association with sand.
> > I was told that the finish will look sandblasted
>
> As might be expected if you blast it with sand :-)
> However, there are many other types of blast media - baking soda, walnut
> shells, corn cob, and a whole range of plastic beads.
> How many of these are practical in your living room I'm not sure, but
> blasting is not a method to be dismissed based on its traditional
> association with sand.
No, it's a method to be dismissed because it's shite. And produces a lot
of shite which hangs around your house forever. Every sandblasted finish
I have seen proudly touted by one builder after another has been
dreadful, no matter how they whittle on about walnut shells etc. The
method involves the least work for them, that's why they like it. It
ruins the appearance of the beams, and it's a great way to create a
house that rains grit on the occupants. Builders never, ever clean up
properly.
The wire brushing technique that I recommended is slower (just) but
produces a good finish provided that one uses a hand brush, not an angle
grinder.
Depends on how thick and hard the paint is. I had thick distemper, paper
adhesive and other paints on several large oak beams. I used a scraper.
The best one I found was a large wood chisel used as a scraper, held at
about 75 degrees to the surface and pulled so that the bevel was on the
trailing side. Yes, it was hard work but the finish showed good grain
and was slightly polished. You can apply pressure in the right places
and tilt the scraper to follow the surface where needed. I used an old
1.5" chisel, but a 1" would be OK.
Peter Scott
Dont exaggerate. It only took about 5 hoovers a week apart to get all
the calcium carbonate out of te riooms.
> I've found that gently wire brushing by hand produces the best results
> but it is tedious work and will take several weeks to do.
>
> Any mechanical means
Including wire brushing
will cause damage to the beams and that seems a
> shame.
Its an unavoidable fact. You cannot get all the stuff OUT of the grain
without ripping it off, and some wood always comes too. The post
carbonate blast here was pretty decent: Yes, it raised the grain, but a
light sand was all it took to get a reasonable finish back.
As usual the only moron here is Firthfart.
Some of us of course have actually done, it and can speak from
experience rather than ignorance.
So dont use sand and mask the cracks to the ceiling void.
> Mike P the 1st
true, but my contract with the blasters never included the clean up, and
they said that there will be dust we miss. That was fine., because we
expected that, and vacuumed a few times to remove it.
No builder was involved
> The wire brushing technique that I recommended is slower (just) but
> produces a good finish provided that one uses a hand brush, not an angle
> grinder.
Er no, I used that as well, and the finish was much rougher than the
carbonate blasting.
That works on planed timber, but its useless of really old stuff done
with e.g. an adze.
It isn't anywhere near smooth to start with, so there is nothing to
scrape down TO.
> Peter Scott
That's that sorted then
> > No, it's a method to be dismissed because it's shite. And produces a lot
> > of shite which hangs around your house forever. Every sandblasted finish
> > I have seen proudly touted by one builder after another has been
> > dreadful, no matter how they whittle on about walnut shells etc. The
> > method involves the least work for them, that's why they like it. It
> > ruins the appearance of the beams, and it's a great way to create a
> > house that rains grit on the occupants. Builders never, ever clean up
> > properly.
> >
> > The wire brushing technique that I recommended is slower (just) but
> > produces a good finish provided that one uses a hand brush, not an angle
> > grinder.
> That's
Heck, you can make anyone's post loo stupid by making unmarked edits.
Are you Drivel?
origi8nally they were balck painted,
now a light colour.
Barbara said it cost her just £40 for a man to do it,
having covered everything in plastic.
And no, it wasnt dripping sand
(but not carpets beneath, and a busy pub with muddy garden outside
so maybe she wouldnt notice
[g]
If the cap fits, don't pull it over your eyebrows.
I have enough experience with wood finishing not to dismiss any
particular method of abrasion. "Builders" are probably not the best
people to be carrying out what is, after all, a specialised job.