Why is epoxy not used more often for sealing timber drainers

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

flanajb

Established Member
UKW Supporter
Joined
11 Mar 2009
Messages
1,314
Reaction score
11
For the 2nd time in 7 years I have had to take out the maple sink top drainer and repair it. Water always seems to get in somewhere and stain the timber. This time around I had to basically rip it down, salvage the bits I could and rebuild it. We have an undermount stainless sink rather than an inset.

So having repaired the top I go to the builders merchants and start looking at possible options

Danish Oil - Rubbish, unless you are diligent and keep reapplying it. We are not and always forget
Acrylic Varnish - used this last time and it seemed ok, but not great, otherwise, I would not have had to repair it again

So this time around I have sealed the area where the undermounted sink goes with epoxy as I never want to have to repair the top again. Whilst putting the epoxy on, I thought "why not seal the whole darn top with epoxy as if it's good enough for the marine industry it's certainly got to be good enough for our kitchen drainer"

Is it because epoxy is just not safe even when it has dried?

Thanks
 
phil.p":3oyhqx6x said:
This doesn't go any way to answering your question, but I have read more than once that undermounted sinks and wooden tops are a no no - maybe because it's thought to be an insurmountable problem?
I too have come to that conclusion and have made a mental note never to fit one again, but money is tight and I cannot afford to go with anything else at the present time.
 
Have you got any pics ? Im a bit slow when it comes to trying to picture something :oops:
 
Wooden worktops, and especially drainers, need regular maintenance, it's unrealistic to expect them to perform like granite or corian or similar.

Cheers, Paul
 
Interesting thread as I am in the process of fitting a maple worktop in our utility room with an undermount Belfast sink. Since the worktop will overhang the sink, I was thinking about running a capillary groove all round the underside of the sink cutout.

As far as finishing goes, I was going to use Osmo particularly as they have a special end grain oil. But trials on a test piece totally ruined the colour of the maple (well, we all knew it would but you have to try). I have tried a number of products and have now settled on Aquacoat SP. It's absolutely brilliant stuff and after three coats (which is what they recommend) there is virtually no change in the colour of the maple. Almost as if nothing has been applied.

I followed that with two coats of Chestnut Microcrystalline wax - which again hardly affects the colour - and left some hot water on top overnight. In the morning, wiped off the water and no sign of any damage to the finish. Very happy bunny here.

Having said that I have just got some Rustin's Worktop stuff which is also water based and so I'll give that a whirl before reaching a final decision.
 
I'm surprised that undermounted and Belfast-style sinks are so popular. Very unhygienic with the way water and stuff gets trapped underneath, particularly with wooden worktops. I'd go for inset, stainless sinks every time.

Cheers :wink:

Paul
 
The trouble with epoxy as a surface coating is that most epoxies are not very u.v. stable and whilst pretty impervious to water if they are damaged in any way and get water underneath them it cannot escape easily. This can cause the bond between wood and epoxy to fail. I use them as a waterproof coating inside buoyancy tanks on their own but anywhere that they could be exposed to long periods of sun or easily damaged then they are overcoated with paint or varnish to protect them.

In my kitchen I got fed up with oiling the surfaces so slapped on a few coats of Ronseal quick drying floor varnish, figuring if it stood up to footsteps and cleaning with a mop it should cope with life on a kitchen surface. That was ten years ago and it is still o.k.......
 
Paul Chapman":23bp7bsu said:
I'm surprised that undermounted and Belfast-style sinks are so popular. Very unhygienic with the way water and stuff gets trapped underneath, particularly with wooden worktops. I'd go for inset, stainless sinks every time.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

Stainless steel sinks are so '60's 8) :lol:
 
And they're still working to this day I bet. We went with stainless sinks in our brand new house as well.
 
+1 for big, rectangular, simple stainless ones. Making them look nice in context is what we pay designers for!

I went round a National Trust property recently, I think it was Buckland Abbey (really, really recommend seeing the Rembrandt there, by the way - it's absolutely stunning, and the C16th panelling).

The butler's pantry drainer was mahogany or teak (most likely) of some sort and had no obvious treatment applied, apart from either bleach or caustic soda occasionaly (I assume). The sink itself was also wooden, to mimise breakages of the family crystal, I was told. It had caulked housing joints!

They 'stoned them' with pumice blocks too, I think.

And the drainer was also jointed, which surprised me a little. I couldn't get a close up look at the sinks in the scullery, but it may have been some other wood. The Victorians evidently had the same problems with them that we do, as there was evidence of leaks from the drainer (but oddly I don't remember seeing any from the sink, although I'll bet it did leak).

But although they didn't know exactly why it was important (bacteria), cleanliness was supposedly right next to godliness, especially in the bigger houses. I've seen beaten copper drainers too, elsewhere (Tyntesfield? Berkley Castle? Might be imagining that.), which would be a good idea, as copper kills bacteria (to an extent).

I've got an Edwardian book on household chemistry downstairs somewhere. If I can find it I'll look to see if the approach they used on wooden stuff is there.

Will report back if I find anything useful.

E.
 
Eric The Viking":dwmsy67j said:
....
But although they didn't know exactly why it was important (bacteria), cleanliness was supposedly right next to godliness, especially in the bigger houses. I've seen beaten copper drainers too, elsewhere (Tyntesfield? Berkley Castle? Might be imagining that.), which would be a good idea, as copper kills bacteria (to an extent).
.....

E.

Spot on. MRSA thrives on stainless steel and dies on copper.
 
Eric The Viking":2gm2623o said:
I've got an Edwardian book on household chemistry downstairs somewhere. If I can find it I'll look to see if the approach they used on wooden stuff is there.

Will report back if I find anything useful.

E.

I read they used vinegar, salt and something else I can't remember (a herb perhaps?).
 
RogerS":2d0df20d said:
Eric The Viking":2d0df20d said:
....
But although they didn't know exactly why it was important (bacteria), cleanliness was supposedly right next to godliness, especially in the bigger houses. I've seen beaten copper drainers too, elsewhere (Tyntesfield? Berkley Castle? Might be imagining that.), which would be a good idea, as copper kills bacteria (to an extent).
.....

E.

Spot on. MRSA thrives on stainless steel and dies on copper.
It thrives on me, as well. :D
 
Eric The Viking":e51slsfe said:
I thought elm rotted readily - being one reason t was used for coffin boards.

Am I wrong? (often am)

E.

Not according to one internet post

Elm wood was valued for its interlocking grain, and consequent resistance to splitting, with significant uses in wheels, chair seats and coffins. The wood is also resistant to decay when permanently wet, and hollowed trunks were widely used as water pipes during the medieval period in Europe. Elms also have a long history of cultivation for fodder, with the leafy branches cut for livestock. Elm bark, cut into strips and boiled, sustained much of the rural population of Norway during the great famine of 1812.
 
Back
Top