42 WOOD TURPENTINE. 



server finds the samples from fair to good in all respects, with those 

 thinned with gum spirits the best in every respect. 



All but one of the experimenters recognized that No. 1 coach var- 

 nish was the most viscous, and thinned it more than they did the 

 other coach varnishes. One also thinned No. 5, which was the next 

 most viscous varnish. None of the experimenters was able to 

 detect working differences in the consistencies of the other samples 

 of coach varnish. Three experimenters apparently attempted to 

 thin the piano rubbing varnishes to approximately the same con- 

 sistency; only one, however, approached the order indicated by the 

 viscosity determination. Considering the results as a whole, it is 

 not possible to state that any of these varnishes behaved materially 

 differently from the others either in drying or under the brush. The 

 observations of two experimenters are in harmony with the viscosity 

 tests, but those of the others are not. Where a difference in luster 

 was observed the wood turpentines were best. 



None of the experimenters thinned the piano flowing varnishes in 

 the order indicated by their viscosities. On these varnishes also the 

 data do not warrant any conclusion as to the differences in their 

 behavior on application, and no practical difference in gloss was 

 observed. These, being flowing varnishes, were not intended to be 

 rubbed, but all of the experimenters, through misunderstanding, 

 rubbed the panels, usually with very unsatisfactory results. 



In making a careful study of the mass of data obtained in this work 

 one is at once impressed with the many different ways in which these 

 varnishes were handled from the thinning to the finishing touches, 

 and by the seemingly contradictory opinions which are drawn regard- 

 ing them. There is no one point on which a decided majority agree 

 except as to odor, and even here some do not object to the wood tur- 

 pentines, while others complain of the gum spirits. So at variance 

 are the reports that the conclusion is almost forced upon one that a 

 workman's opinion of a varnish is largely influenced by whether or 

 not it may be manipulated as he is used to handling varnishes under 

 his working conditions. Other factors influencing the quality of 

 varnish do not enter here because these samples are identical except 

 as to the character and amount of thinner used. The above conclu- 

 sion is not only supported by the contradictory reports, but also by the 

 statements made by some that none of the varnishes was satisfactory. 



It is rather surprising that no marked differences between the indi- 

 vidual samples of the same class are definitely indicated in the 

 reports of the several workmen. The determined viscosities of the 

 several varnishes of a class indicate the order in which they should be 

 thinned to bring them to the same consistency, or make them flow 

 alike. The turpentines employed differed greatly, however, in 

 their drying properties. The analyses indicate that Nos. 1 and 3 



