Controlling Decay in Above-Water Parts of Waterfront Structures

Shallow penetration of preservative and deep checking in some Douglas-fir piles and associated members above water suggested a need for supplementary treatment. Pentachlorophenol and cresote-treated curbs with deep checks required supplementary treatment as decay was noted in some as early as 4 years after installation. However, unexpectedly, curbs with deep checks that were treated with fluor-chrome-arsenic-phenol did not show decay. Supplementary treatment by flooding preservative solutions into checks provided little protection against decay in creosote-treated curbs, because at the time of treatment infection may have been too deep. In areas of heavy traffic, planking treated with creosote showed little checking and wear, whereas planking treated with fluor-chrome-arsenicphenol was heavily checked and had slivered surfaces. Although under heavy traffic, creosoted planking apparently outwore FCAP planking; both types of treated planking outlasted untreated planking. Simple supplementary treatment of Douglas-fir piles on the top cutoff surface by applying a fungicide and a capping compound would apparently add substantial service life to piles.

You must be logged in to download any documents. Please login (login accounts are free) or learn how to Become a Member