Waterproof vs: Non-waterproof India Ink

[Lemosteam]

Fabulous, you should sell these after making a machine that will build them for you.   

Don't forget some 4'x10' stacks

[Maletrain]

Really nice effect!  Thanks for the development and "how-to" posts.  I will probably use this technique to make the lumber for my saw mill, although without the bands, because my era is early 1950s.

[narrowminded]

Fabulous, you should sell these after making a machine that will build them for you.   

Don't forget some 4'x10' stacks

Thanks.   They wouldn't lend themselves to mass production because of the painting.  Unless I figured out how to print the wood grain.   They really weren't hard to do.  And I did cut up 10, 12, and 16' lengths.  Basically the best part of a single sheet, partially printed and the rest fillers.  The yield will be about twenty 2' stacks.  I will likely do some as broken pallets with some loose individual boards.

[narrowminded]

Really nice effect!  Thanks for the development and "how-to" posts.  I will probably use this technique to make the lumber for my saw mill, although without the bands, because my era is early 1950s.

Because of the interest I will add to this as I go, after I get home.  I can add a little about getting the knots to look like knots.

[peteski]

Tutorial on depicting N scale knots?  Now I've heard everything! 

[narrowminded]

Tutorial on depicting N scale knots?  Now I've heard everything! 

Would they not look like a wood knot I would not bother.

[peteski]

Would they not look like a wood knot I would not bother.

BOOOOO!! HISSSSS!  Very punny! 

[narrowminded]

I will probably use this technique to make the lumber for my saw mill, although without the bands, because my era is early 1950s.

They didn't band wood pallets in the early fifties?  Is there more you can add to this?  I ask because I have only the most basic  knowledge of lumber and nothing at that level of detail.  I'd be most interested in the transition era to maybe mid sixties.  I was assuming they weren't plastic wrapped in that era but assumed banding would be OK to hold it all together.  And all of that is just a guess.

[wazzou]

@narrowminded - I'm unsure of your era but keep in mind that currently American Lumber Standards unit sizes are
typically 24" high x 48" wide which allows for two "units" or packages side by side on a truck bed and stacked to limit height to 14' overall.

Package banding was always metal and started being nearly universal around 1960 where plastic banding has only gained traction since the late 1990's.
Plastic banding isn't as strong but eliminates rust streaks or stains on lumber intended for exposed use.

[narrowminded]

@narrowminded - I'm unsure of your era but keep in mind that currently American Lumber Standards unit sizes are typically 24" high x 48" wide which allows for two "units" or packages side by side on a truck bed and stacked to limit height to 14' overall.

Package banding was always metal and started being nearly universal around 1960 where plastic banding has only gained traction since the late 1990's.

Thanks.  The pallet sizes I made (not all completed) are 2' x 4' x  lengths of 8', 10', 12', and 16'.  I found those in a search when I started this. It's nice to have them confirmed.  And a search for history of steel strapping suggests it could very well have been used from the twenties and on but nothing that says the lumber industry specifically used it.  Based on apparent growth in popularity of the method I'm guessing that from the forties on it could be likely it would be seen on at least some lumber pallets.  Any thoughts on that assumption?

[Maletrain]

According to Kalmbach's "Guide to Industries Along the Tracks 4" chapter on lumber: "Railcars and Loading.  From the 1800s through the mid-1900s, boxcars were the common method of carrying cut lumber.  Loading and unloading was done board by board." (p67)

From what little I remember of lumber yards when I was a kid in the 1950s, there were rails coming into the yards and the racks on both sides had lumber sorted by sizes in neat stacks, but nothing was tied together with bands or showed marks from bands.  I sort of remember later, maybe in the late 1950s or early 1960s, seeing lumber in banded stacks and noting that those steel bands were cutting into the wood on the outside surfaces of the stacks, particularly in the corner locations, and feeling that it was somehow a cheapening of the process.  That was also about the time that I realized the newer "2x4" boards were really 1½" x 3½" and the ones in my grand dads shop were about ¼" larger in both dimensions.  That made some repairs on the old house a bit harder.

[narrowminded]

According to Kalmbach's "Guide to Industries Along the Tracks 4" chapter on lumber: "Railcars and Loading.  From the 1800s through the mid-1900s, boxcars were the common method of carrying cut lumber.  Loading and unloading was done board by board." (p67)

From what little I remember of lumber yards when I was a kid in the 1950s, there were rails coming into the yards and the racks on both sides had lumber sorted by sizes in neat stacks, but nothing was tied together with bands or showed marks from bands.  I sort of remember later, maybe in the late 1950s or early 1960s, seeing lumber in banded stacks and noting that those steel bands were cutting into the wood on the outside surfaces of the stacks, particularly in the corner locations, and feeling that it was somehow a cheapening of the process.

Thanks.  That's helpful.   A little more insight into the process.    

It also helps to have a reason for at least the second story of that shed not having an obvious way to load boards other than by hand.  The bays are less than 8' wide and no other way evident to load other than by hand (maybe a fork lift) up to the railing, outside, and then by hand from there into the bay.  Sounds like a time consuming job.