Hi,I recently found some nice reclaimed wood (Floor joists from the Charlestown Armory in Boston) that I want to make into a dining table like this:

https://drive.google.com/a/jimryan.c...&usp=sha ring

I ran one of the pieces of lumber through my planer and it appears to look like Douglas Fir, so it is a bit reddish in tone. The wood is ~14" wide, 2" thick, and ~7 foot long I have 4 of them. The table is planned to be 3' x 7'. I plan to to plane each of the boards on both sides so the surface is flat. But the person I am making it for wants that look like in the picture above. So I'm not really sure how to treat it when I'm done putting it together. I also am now sure what to do with the legs, aprons and other pieces below. I'm not sure if I need to search for more reclaimed lumber or just find some more Douglas Fir at a lumber yard and treat it somehow to make it look old.

Thank you for any thoughts.

Jim

On Sunday, July 5, 2015 at 11:23:07 AM UTC-5, wrote:
Hi,I recently found some nice reclaimed wood (Floor joists from the Charlestown Armory in Boston) that I want to make into a dining table like this:

https://drive.google.com/a/jimryan.c...&usp=sha ring

I ran one of the pieces of lumber through my planer and it appears to look like Douglas Fir, so it is a bit reddish in tone. The wood is ~14" wide, 2" thick, and ~7 foot long I have 4 of them. The table is planned to be 3' x 7'. I plan to to plane each of the boards on both sides so the surface is flat. But the person I am making it for wants that look like in the picture above. So I'm not really sure how to treat it when I'm done putting it together. I also am now sure what to do with the legs, aprons and other pieces below. I'm not sure if I need to search for more reclaimed lumber or just find some more Douglas Fir at a lumber yard and treat it somehow to make it look old.

Thank you for any thoughts.

Jim

I needed permission to view the pic. I clicked the request tab.

Any relation to Michael (Mike) Ryan (You dog!), who attended Uni. of Idaho (Moscow) in 1973-74, and maybe '75 & '76? He was my (dorm) room mate. We lost touch, sometime after I left Idaho.

Sonny

On Sunday, July 5, 2015 at 12:34:29 PM UTC-4, Sonny wrote:
On Sunday, July 5, 2015 at 11:23:07 AM UTC-5, wrote:
Hi,I recently found some nice reclaimed wood (Floor joists from the Charlestown Armory in Boston) that I want to make into a dining table like this:

https://drive.google.com/a/jimryan.c...&usp=sha ring

I ran one of the pieces of lumber through my planer and it appears to look like Douglas Fir, so it is a bit reddish in tone. The wood is ~14" wide, 2" thick, and ~7 foot long I have 4 of them. The table is planned to be 3' x 7'. I plan to to plane each of the boards on both sides so the surface is flat. But the person I am making it for wants that look like in the picture above. So I'm not really sure how to treat it when I'm done putting it together. I also am now sure what to do with the legs, aprons and other pieces below. I'm not sure if I need to search for more reclaimed lumber or just find some more Douglas Fir at a lumber yard and treat it somehow to make it look old.

Thank you for any thoughts.

Jim

I needed permission to view the pic. I clicked the request tab.

Any relation to Michael (Mike) Ryan (You dog!), who attended Uni. of Idaho (Moscow) in 1973-74, and maybe '75 & '76? He was my (dorm) room mate. We lost touch, sometime after I left Idaho.

Sonny

I reset the link so no permission is needed, and I granted you permission as well.

No, sorry, to my knowledge I don't know Michael Ryan. Leave it to an Irishman to go to school in Idaho. They just can't get away from potatoes.

On Sunday, July 5, 2015 at 2:48:41 PM UTC-5, wrote:

Looks very similar to cypress: color, grain, the knots, the small checks along the center line. Cypress is a relatively soft (density) wood.

I ran one of the pieces of lumber through my planer ....

Did it smell like or have a hint of a smell of turpentine, once planed? Freshly cut pine will have a smell, or at least a slight smell, of turpentine, even with old lumber.



But the person I am making it for wants that look like in the picture above.

That (last) pic, of a completed table, is SYP. I would never install a bread board on a thick slabbed table top. I suggest you discuss, with the owner, not using a bread board on the proposed table top. That design aspect would cheapen a nice old salvaged thick-plank table top. Use the fourth board for a wider tabletop or use the fourth board for the skirt ~~~ it would match the tabletop. Re the pic: That wide of bread board looks bad, awkward, not right, also. A plank table top should not need a bread board. If expansion-contraction is going to be suspect, then use dutchmans, under neath if need be.

The end grains will absorb more stain, so if you stain, try to do some testing on any cut-offs, for end grain staining. Personally, I wouldn't stain anything. I'd simply clearcoat the table, once prepped.

As long as the table top results are pristine, then it doesn't matter what kind of base you build right now (for use by the owner). The table top is the most important part, to get right and be perfect, to look and be its best. A different base can always be built, later, if need be. Re that pictured table base is basic. Look for a better design and better wood, if time permits. 4X and 2X framing stock is not the greatest lumber for a dining table base.

Sonny

On 07/05/2015 11:23 AM, wrote:
Hi,I recently found some nice reclaimed wood (Floor joists from the
Charlestown Armory in Boston) that I want to make into a dining
table like this:
....

I ran one of the pieces of lumber through my planer and it appears
to look like Douglas Fir, ...

It is _not_ Doug Fir; show a clean crosscut to show some end grain but
I'm virtually certain it's SYP (southern yellow pine).

--

dpb wrote in :

On 07/05/2015 11:23 AM, wrote:
Hi,I recently found some nice reclaimed wood (Floor joists from the
Charlestown Armory in Boston) that I want to make into a dining
table like this:
...

I ran one of the pieces of lumber through my planer and it appears
to look like Douglas Fir, ...

It is _not_ Doug Fir; show a clean crosscut to show some end grain but
I'm virtually certain it's SYP (southern yellow pine).

There was a huge trade in southern yellow pine from the southern
states to the New England states in the years between the Civil
War and World War I. It was the preferred material for building
and similar purposes (ships, etc) during that time.

If you see a picture of a sailing schooner (a "down easter"),
you can be pretty certain the cargo is either coal or southern
yellow pine - two commodities that needed to ship cheapest way
possible, and no-one particularly cared when they got there.

John

On Sunday, July 5, 2015 at 4:18:59 PM UTC-5, dpb wrote:

It is _not_ Doug Fir; show a clean crosscut to show some end grain but
I'm virtually certain it's SYP (southern yellow pine).

Hmmmm, I'm leaning toward your assuredness. That test staining and clearcoat/wetted(?) sample looks splotchy. Splotchy results are more in tune for SYP, than cypress, but the planks still look a heck of a lot like cypress, to me. Cypress was also shipped, in bulk, to northern states. My salvaged pine planks don't look like his planks, especially with those small checks down the center line of his planks.

Agreed. End grain photos would be nice.
Bald Cypress - http://www.hobbithouseinc.com/person...ss,%20bald.htm

YP - http://www.hobbithouseinc.com/person...,%20yellow.htm

Sonny

On 07/05/2015 5:50 PM, Sonny wrote:
On Sunday, July 5, 2015 at 4:18:59 PM UTC-5, dpb wrote:

It is _not_ Doug Fir; show a clean crosscut to show some end grain but
I'm virtually certain it's SYP (southern yellow pine).

Hmmmm, I'm leaning toward your assuredness. That test staining and
clearcoat/wetted(?) sample looks splotchy. Splotchy results are more in
tune for SYP, than cypress, but the planks still look a heck of a lot
like cypress, to me. Cypress was also shipped, in bulk, to northern
states. My salvaged pine planks don't look like his planks, especially
with those small checks down the center line of his planks.
....

I've quite a lot of old SYP that has checked; probably as much that
hasn't. All depends on how it was dried and these were probably full 2"
and 14" wide for construction, not finish, so likely weren't dried to
full end result initially.

It doesn't look much like cypress at all to me...but the telltale end
grain could be the conclusive piece of evidence.

But, one think it _isn't_ is Doug fir...

--

Sonny wrote in
:

Hmmmm, I'm leaning toward your assuredness. That test staining and
clearcoat/wetted(?) sample looks splotchy. Splotchy results are more
in tune for SYP, than cypress, but the planks still look a heck of a
lot like cypress, to me. Cypress was also shipped, in bulk, to
northern states. My salvaged pine planks don't look like his planks,
especially with those small checks down the center line of his planks.

OP said the reclaimed timbers were floor joists. I'm dubious
about cypress being used for that kind of structural application,
it was more commonly used for siding and shingles. SYP fits
the application a lot better.

John

On Monday, July 6, 2015 at 12:35:38 PM UTC-4, John McCoy wrote:
Sonny wrote in
:

Hmmmm, I'm leaning toward your assuredness. That test staining and
clearcoat/wetted(?) sample looks splotchy. Splotchy results are more
in tune for SYP, than cypress, but the planks still look a heck of a
lot like cypress, to me. Cypress was also shipped, in bulk, to
northern states. My salvaged pine planks don't look like his planks,
especially with those small checks down the center line of his planks.

OP said the reclaimed timbers were floor joists. I'm dubious
about cypress being used for that kind of structural application,
it was more commonly used for siding and shingles. SYP fits
the application a lot better.

John

Thank you all for some great advice. I'll try to put some end grain shots up there today or tomorrow.

On Monday, July 6, 2015 at 12:50:00 PM UTC-5, wrote:


Thank you all for some great advice. I'll try to put some end grain shots up there today or tomorrow.

Google search for images of long leaf pine dining tables.
https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C...otZ Y7N-BM%3A

Click on pics of interest, for ideas for your table's design, like maybe the base of this table: http://mecox.com/product/extraordina...e-dining-table
Seems to be simple & easy geometry, probably with mortise & tenon jointery, and still looks elegant. This is a very heavy table, though.... wouldn't be moved very often, if at all.

No matter what the lumber is, you probably have some very good lumber. Any old nice salvaged lumber is premium, IMO, so strive for the best design possible and do your best work possible. Don't rush and don't skimp. And show us some
finished pics, also.

Sonny

On Monday, July 6, 2015 at 11:35:38 AM UTC-5, John McCoy wrote:

OP said the reclaimed timbers were floor joists. I'm dubious
about cypress being used for that kind of structural application,
it was more commonly used for siding and shingles. SYP fits
the application a lot better.

John

That's incorrect. You can't think in terms of today's usage. Think in terms of what was going on back then, in the 1700s, 1800s, & even into the early 1900s, to some extent.

Cypress was widely use for framing in all parts of homes and many other buildings, probably just as much as pine. Actually, SYP wasn't the top pine choice, back then. It was long leaf pine, not SYP, that was the premium pine lumber and most widely sought after and used. Once all the premium pine was logged, the poorer quality pines, like the yellow pines, were used. Poorer quality yellow pine grew faster, in order to replace the premiums, hence, just about all that remains, since the early 1900s, is the poorer quality yellow pines, i.e., those that we are most familiar with, today. We can't apply today's rationale to the events and circumstances of long ago..

SYP was/is a magnet for termites, powder post beetles and other insects, despite having a turpentine content. That old cypress was used because its very much more resistance to insects, very resistance to rotting and it is structurally sound for that framing use.

His boards don't look quite like long leaf pine, either, but they just might be.

Down south, today, salvaged old cypress and salvaged long leaf pine are premium "decor" lumbers for many applications, rather than being as commonly used utility-wise or structural-wise, as long ago.

For one test, he needs to smell that planed surface, to see if it has an odor of turpentine. If it's pine, he should have gotten a distinct whiff of the turpentine scent, when planing, without having to go back, now, and sniff the planed surface.

I don't know if the western varieties of pine have the turpentine scent. Just about all the eastern/south eastern pines do have the scent.

Sonny

On 07/06/2015 12:53 PM, Sonny wrote:
On Monday, July 6, 2015 at 11:35:38 AM UTC-5, John McCoy wrote:

OP said the reclaimed timbers were floor joists. I'm dubious
about cypress being used for that kind of structural application,
it was more commonly used for siding and shingles. SYP fits
the application a lot better.

John

That's incorrect. You can't think in terms of today's usage. Think
in terms of what was going on back then, in the 1700s, 1800s,& even
into the early 1900s, to some extent.

You're getting a little carried away here, Sonny.

Looking it up the Armory wasn't built until 1907 by which time
commercial framing lumber was pretty much commonplace.

The barn out here in SW KS built just after rationing was lifted
following armistice of WWI (Nov 1918) was only some 10 year later and
it's all SYP looking very much like OP's samples.

The very first glance of the first planed piece made me initially think
it was a red oak given the two-hued shades with the distinctive sap wood
to the edges at the right end of the plank but on further looking
there's no indication of the typical oak porosity and the appearance of
the medullary rays are just so distinctive is why I'm pretty sure...

--

Sonny wrote in
:

Actually, SYP wasn't
the top pine choice, back then. It was long leaf pine, not SYP, that
was the premium pine lumber and most widely sought after and used.
Once all the premium pine was logged, the poorer quality pines, like
the yellow pines, were used.

Maybe I'm mistaken, but I'd always heard of longleaf as being
a yellow pine. Longleaf, loblolly, slash, and one other I'm
forgetting where the southern yellow pines. Now-a-days most
of what you get is slash pine, because it grows faster. Not
really sure when the old growth was logged out, but I think
it would have been in the WW1 timeframe.

I'll grant you, the northern and western white pines were
superior lumber, especially for purposes other than construction.

John

wrote in message
...

Hi,I recently found some nice reclaimed wood (Floor joists from the
Charlestown Armory in Boston) that I want to make into a dining table like
this:

https://drive.google.com/a/jimryan.c...&usp=sha ring

I ran one of the pieces of lumber through my planer and it appears to look
like Douglas Fir, so it is a bit reddish in tone. The wood is ~14" wide,
2" thick, and ~7 foot long I have 4 of
them. The table is planned to be 3' x 7'. I plan to to plane each of the
boards on both sides so the surface is flat. But the person I am making it
for wants that look like in the picture above. So I'm not really sure how
to treat it when I'm done putting it together. I also am now sure what to
do with the legs, aprons and other pieces below. I'm not sure if I need to
search for more reclaimed lumber or just find some more Douglas Fir at a
lumber yard and treat it somehow to make it look old.

You might try 3-4 coats of dark brown paste wax as a finish.... yes it would
need to be refreshed over time but it would likely give that non-uniform
look. A wax finish was common on relatively rustic furniture in past
centuries... (i.e., not fine furniture).

If you skip the bread board ends you could resaw the 4th board and use it to
veneer glued up pine to create the legs and stretchers. By tennoning the
long stretcher and putting it into a mortise, instead of having it lap over
the short stretchers, you would hide all the ends. By doing this all the
wood in the table would match, it would take the finish the same, and it
would save you from having to match "new" wood to "old" wood.

John

One way to tell is weight. SYP is a heavier than either cypress or Douglas Fir. Also, as Sonny mentioned, sand a bit of it and see if you get the "pine smell." The fir will not smell and the cypress has a much more subtle odor.

Deb

On Sunday, July 5, 2015 at 12:23:07 PM UTC-4, wrote:
Hi,I recently found some nice reclaimed wood (Floor joists from the Charlestown Armory in Boston) that I want to make into a dining table like this:

https://drive.google.com/a/jimryan.c...&usp=sha ring

I ran one of the pieces of lumber through my planer and it appears to look like Douglas Fir, so it is a bit reddish in tone. The wood is ~14" wide, 2" thick, and ~7 foot long I have 4 of them. The table is planned to be 3' x 7'. I plan to to plane each of the boards on both sides so the surface is flat. But the person I am making it for wants that look like in the picture above. So I'm not really sure how to treat it when I'm done putting it together. I also am now sure what to do with the legs, aprons and other pieces below. I'm not sure if I need to search for more reclaimed lumber or just find some more Douglas Fir at a lumber yard and treat it somehow to make it look old.

Thank you for any thoughts.

Jim

Ok, I posted the pics of the end grain. This is really proving to be very educational for me so thanks. I don't think they are Oak, that's one of the woods I recognize pretty reliably, and this doesn't look like it. Oh, I also had a go with some dark brown Briwax and was very happy with it. So the colors on it are stain, Was over shellac, wax alone.

Jim

On 07/06/2015 3:38 PM, wrote:
....

Ok, I posted the pics of the end grain. This is really proving to be
very educational for me so thanks. I don't think they are Oak, that's
one of the woods I recognize pretty reliably, and this doesn't look like
it. ...


Ay-up, that there's SYP fer shure...

I was certain after a second look it wasn't oak too altho the overall
two-hues of the one piece are consistent with the heartwood/sapwood one
often sees. But, as noted earlier as soon as looked at a closer look
the porosity isn't there and you can clearly also see with the end grain
wrong cell structure.

--

wrote in message
...

On Sunday, July 5, 2015 at 12:23:07 PM UTC-4, wrote:
Hi,I recently found some nice reclaimed wood (Floor joists from the
Charlestown Armory in Boston) that I want to make into a dining table like
this:

https://drive.google.com/a/jimryan.c...&usp=sha ring


Ok, I posted the pics of the end grain. This is really proving to be very
educational for me so thanks. I don't think they are Oak, that's one of
the woods I recognize pretty reliably, and this doesn't look like it. Oh,
I also had a go with some dark brown Briwax and was very happy with it. So
the colors on it are stain, Was over shellac, wax alone.

Glad the dark brown wax is appealing...

When I looked at the original pictures I was thinking it was chestnut... the
latest pictures haven't changed that impression. If I could see it in person
and smell it I may have a different impression!

John

On Monday, July 6, 2015 at 9:58:22 PM UTC-4, John Grossbohlin wrote:
wrote in message
...

On Sunday, July 5, 2015 at 12:23:07 PM UTC-4, wrote:
Hi,I recently found some nice reclaimed wood (Floor joists from the
Charlestown Armory in Boston) that I want to make into a dining table like
this:

https://drive.google.com/a/jimryan.c...&usp=sha ring


Ok, I posted the pics of the end grain. This is really proving to be very
educational for me so thanks. I don't think they are Oak, that's one of
the woods I recognize pretty reliably, and this doesn't look like it. Oh,
I also had a go with some dark brown Briwax and was very happy with it. So
the colors on it are stain, Was over shellac, wax alone.

Glad the dark brown wax is appealing...

When I looked at the original pictures I was thinking it was chestnut... the
latest pictures haven't changed that impression. If I could see it in person
and smell it I may have a different impression!

John

Yeah, I tried attaching a scent to the picture, but it wouldn't stick...

Now I have to figure out the finish. I like the wax, but it alone won't be a durable enough finish. The stain I put on was a MinWax poly stain, I don't really like the color, but if I got the right one it might be good. Any thoughts?

wrote in message
...

On Monday, July 6, 2015 at 9:58:22 PM UTC-4, John Grossbohlin wrote:

Glad the dark brown wax is appealing...

When I looked at the original pictures I was thinking it was chestnut...
the
latest pictures haven't changed that impression. If I could see it in
person
and smell it I may have a different impression!

John

Yeah, I tried attaching a scent to the picture, but it wouldn't stick...

Now I have to figure out the finish. I like the wax, but it alone won't be
a durable enough finish. The stain I put on was a MinWax poly stain, I
don't really like the color, but if I got the right one it might be good.
Any thoughts?

I've got a couple hybrid American/Japanese chestnut trees in my yard. The
catkins are falling now and the burrs will start forming soon. They make a
mess and the squirrels love them... I've milled some small boards from storm
damaged branches over the years with which I've made some keepsake boxes.
The wood has a color and smell that is different from the various oaks and
pines I've encountered over the years.

For a rustic piece the wax alone would probably be fine and it would build
more character over time... though it does need reapplication based on wear.
My former associate Wallace Gusler is a fan of wax and microcrystalline wax
is a favorite of preservationists of not only furniture but of things like
guns. http://www.shellac.net/wax_art.html

An alternative could be a stain of appropriate color that is wiped off to
show the variance in the hardness of the grain and then a separate finish
like polyurethane applied over it. I don't think you could get the color
affect correct using a combination stain/finish while also getting a film
build up.

John

On Mon, 6 Jul 2015 21:59:16 -0400, "John Grossbohlin"
wrote:

wrote in message
...

On Sunday, July 5, 2015 at 12:23:07 PM UTC-4, wrote:
Hi,I recently found some nice reclaimed wood (Floor joists from the
Charlestown Armory in Boston) that I want to make into a dining table like
this:

https://drive.google.com/a/jimryan.c...&usp=sha ring


Ok, I posted the pics of the end grain. This is really proving to be very
educational for me so thanks. I don't think they are Oak, that's one of
the woods I recognize pretty reliably, and this doesn't look like it. Oh,
I also had a go with some dark brown Briwax and was very happy with it. So
the colors on it are stain, Was over shellac, wax alone.

Glad the dark brown wax is appealing...

When I looked at the original pictures I was thinking it was chestnut... the
latest pictures haven't changed that impression. If I could see it in person
and smell it I may have a different impression!

John
I didn't see the pictures but from the description (and the source) I
also wondered if it might not be "American Chestnut".
It's pretty well extinct now but was once one of the most common
construction woods in the eastern USA

On 07/06/2015 8:59 PM, John Grossbohlin wrote:
....

When I looked at the original pictures I was thinking it was chestnut...
the latest pictures haven't changed that impression. If I could see it
in person and smell it I may have a different impression!
....

I see none of the characteristic open porosity of chestnut...

--

On 07/07/2015 7:14 AM, dpb wrote:
On 07/06/2015 8:59 PM, John Grossbohlin wrote:
...

When I looked at the original pictures I was thinking it was chestnut...
the latest pictures haven't changed that impression. If I could see it
in person and smell it I may have a different impression!
...

I see none of the characteristic open porosity of chestnut...

Intended to add/ask--I've seen none of the new hybrids milled into
lumber but I'd presume they also are open-pored? (Wouldn't seem to
qualify as the chestnut part of the equation otherswise ).

Are the hybrids also partial to becoming wormy or has the hybridization
disturbed that trend, too?

There was quite a lot of chestnut reclaimed from fallen logs in VA
during the time we were in Lynchburg (late '60s/thru most '70s) so saw
quite a lot of the American chestnut that way. There was one sizable
specimen that survived the blight that VA Tech (VPI) foresters were
protecting with their lives that got to take a field trip to visit.
They went so far as to use the spy-novel expediency of using blindfolds
part of the way so visitors couldn't inadvertently or on purpose reveal
the location they were so serious of protecting it...

I don't know what became of that effort, I ought to see if can track
down any of those folks any longer but it's been since in the mid '80s
that last knew anything of them.

There's one American elm in splendid isolation here on the farm in far
SW KS where there were so few and we were far enough from town that the
Dutch elm disease didn't get it. AFAIK there are none surviving in
town. It's a tough place for most trees out here, and this has only
reached 30-40 ft in 70 or 80 years but it's a gorgeously-shaped
specimen. Unfortunately, the American elm isn't self-fertile so while
it puts out a zillion seeds every spring, none ever get pollinated to
make new ones... All we get are a zillion of the Siberian elms every
year, a very poor cousin indeed.

--

On 07/07/2015 8:07 AM, dpb wrote:
....

There was quite a lot of chestnut reclaimed from fallen logs in VA
during the time we were in Lynchburg (late '60s/thru most '70s) so saw
quite a lot of the American chestnut that way. There was one sizable
specimen that survived the blight that VA Tech (VPI) foresters were
protecting with their lives that got to take a field trip to visit. They
went so far as to use the spy-novel expediency of using blindfolds part
of the way so visitors couldn't inadvertently or on purpose reveal the
location they were so serious of protecting it...

I don't know what became of that effort, I ought to see if can track
down any of those folks any longer but it's been since in the mid '80s
that last knew anything of them.
....

Well, a search as I suspected uncovered none of the fella's I knew
nearly 40 year ago but there's still a program at VPI towards the
chestnut as well as the hemlocks (that are falling prey to the woolly
adelgid in alarming numbers all thru the Smokys).

No articles I could find mentioned the remaining pure American chestnuts
other than as seed and genetic source for current research; nothing
about any sizable regrowth ones. It's amazing but even after a hundred
years or so since the massacre there are still roots that do spring up
shoots for a while until the blight finds them...the one that seemed to
have at least sufficient natural resistance to keep it going was about
25 year estimated back then; it would be
beginning-to-get-towards-majestic specimen by now if it did survive...

--

"dpb" wrote in message ...

On 07/06/2015 8:59 PM, John Grossbohlin wrote:
....

When I looked at the original pictures I was thinking it was chestnut...
the latest pictures haven't changed that impression. If I could see it
in person and smell it I may have a different impression!
....

I see none of the characteristic open porosity of chestnut...

I don't think the end cut was terribly revealing of the grain structure...
this as it is not very clean. There seemed to be hints of open cell
structure in some areas and other areas seemed "smeared" by the blade. It
either needed to be cut with say a WWII, planed with a hand plane, or shaved
with a sharp chisel to give a better idea of the structure. As I mentioned
previously, seeing and smelling the wood in person might change my
impressions but it still strikes me as chestnut based on what I've seen of
it.

On 07/08/2015 12:25 PM, John Grossbohlin wrote:
"dpb" wrote in message ...

On 07/06/2015 8:59 PM, John Grossbohlin wrote:
...

When I looked at the original pictures I was thinking it was chestnut...
the latest pictures haven't changed that impression. If I could see it
in person and smell it I may have a different impression!
...

I see none of the characteristic open porosity of chestnut...

I don't think the end cut was terribly revealing of the grain
structure... this as it is not very clean. There seemed to be hints of
open cell structure in some areas and other areas seemed "smeared" by
the blade. It either needed to be cut with say a WWII, planed with a
hand plane, or shaved with a sharp chisel to give a better idea of the
structure. As I mentioned previously, seeing and smelling the wood in
person might change my impressions but it still strikes me as chestnut
based on what I've seen of it.

While not pristine, looks clear enough to me there are no ring porous
rings but simply the growth rings. Chestnut (like oak, doesn't have
that color difference but the late wood rings are separated by the
earlywood porous rings, even more pronounced generally than the oaks.
The characteristic difference between it and the oaks is that the
medullary rays aren't visible with naked eye as are in oak.

http://web.utk.edu/~mtaylo29/pages/Identifying%20Chestnut.htm

The end grain of OP's isn't going to look anything whatever like this
irregardless of how much he polishes it up.

I also go back to the age and purpose and government building and think
even by then chestnut wouldn't have been on the low bidder list.

--