Titebond III testing

When you start comparing physical attributes of epoxy to the other adhesives available, it becomes very clear why epoxy is the dog to hunt with. The question then becomes do I need epoxy for this application. Most modern building practices are using epoxy way more then they truly need. Folks are embalming their boats, which is good, but it's also costly, time consuming and labor intensive, all of which drives up the effort and cost of a project.

Jimbo sounds like he was in the boat (10 years ago) that I am now. I'm fooling with goo to get my needs and working with formulators, even considering formulating myself for resale. The more testing I do, the more I find alternatives to epoxy use and the more I realize how good certain formulations are.

Those that want testing results should contact me through email or give me a call. I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with product defense teams.

 

Agreed to keep this thread adhesi... I mean cohesive. Just a word though regarding the wedged stopped (not through) tenon. We used to call those fox joints. You had to be precise or the joint wouldn't come together--- and possibly not apart again either.
I bought my first Titebond 111 tonight, and tried it out laminating a lip for the SOF kayak coaming. A half an hour is fast setting, at least to remove spring clamps (about 30 of them). I like that. Water cleanup--- I like that too. This is an application where I think the product is just right. The piece has no great loading, nor is it hidden, in case I want to catch a problem just starting. I've been using polyurethyane glue (Gorilla type) but I am going to shift to T3 for a while and see how it works out.
I'd hesitate to use it for a mid-gunwale scarf (I used epoxy there), but low stressed laminations shoukl be good candidates.

 

Ive been using T2 for a long time and T3 since its been out I have some now setting up on a drafting table Im building, but in regards to ship building I am not so sure about it any more.

yup its got lots of good qualities but this biz about other glues not sticking with it is kinda worrying. My builds tend to not fall apart and so Ive really never had to fix one but I have had to do my share of cleaning and new part making when it comes to stuff people bring me to fix. Most of the time I dont really know what kind of glue was used to best thing is to just cut it out or remake the part.

the bits about catastrophic failure aren't to comforting either

At this point I'll be going with epoxy used sparingly in key areas like scarfs and stringer connections, keel connections bla bla bla although Ive never done anything other than keyed hook scarfs with bolts or pins and never had a problem. That said, there is always room for improvement.

but lathering cheep wood in hugely expensive epoxy rather than just buy good water resistant wood in the first place kinda just shows a lack of craftsmanship IMHO.

although I got a serious urge to do a little diagonal planking on my build to gain that stiffness it so obviously imparts. My only hesitation is that the process involves the use of so much epoxy. Thus my avid interest in the thread

Alan I think they call that deja vu didnt we have this conversation about fox locked vs suicide locked before. Ill give you that many books only use the term fox locked in reference to both types of joints at least the ones that Ive seen but Ill stick with what old Roby taught me on this one. A suicide lock is, in my book, a stopped mortise with a wedged tenon. Idea being that if you screw it up ( easy to do ) you have wrecked the joint and will be starting over. The fox lock refers to a through tenon generally left proud and tapered with a wedge. A joint that is significantly easier and one that I have used many times.

It is unfortunate that someone like Roby didnt write down all his knowledge of old time shipbuilding and I regret that I didnt pay closer attention to all that he had to teach us kids. I notice no ones ever heard of a bridle cut either, nor do most people seem to know what a feather tenon is, or a hammer beam or even what cruck work is.

somehow Alan I think we could go round and round on woodworking terminology and both have a great time doing so

but back to glue and this time lets stay there
can I or cant I use pl in below water line applications ?
guess Ill have to boil some up for myself and float it in a lake for a season or two
it sure would be easy to use and Ive used the stuff on countless home builds so I know how strong that stuff is

well this I guess will be my motivation for today since Ive got nothing else to do and the stock market doesnt look conducive to a well planned trade today.
Im going to cut some test pieces of red ceder and glue em with pl give em a few days to dry and throw several outside in the sun to bake Ill boil a few others and just soak a few as well
that and drink beer

dam the things I do for excitement

an hour or so later and Ive got a number of test pieces drying
the glue is LNP-901 construction adhesive
I have multiple test subjects of
red ceder to red ceder
red ceder to white oak
and white oak to white oak
all will be tested to destruction with the results checked for consistency through multiple test subjects
I placed each piece cross grain to one another face to face
Ill boil all pieces for say two hours and then soak em for a few weeks then Ill dry em out and test them to destruction
I will be hanging each piece once dried with a known weight suspended from it for 24 hours at which point more weight will be added until each piece fails

I got pictures of what Ive done so far but they are pretty boring actually


PRODUCT DESCRIPTION
LIQUID NAILS
®
Heavy Duty Construction Adhesive, LN-901/LNP-901,
bridges gaps, provides 10 minutes working time and produces a
durable, flexible, and impact-resistant bond on the heaviest materials.
With antioxidants added for superior all-weather performance.

(when applied below 90ºF)

NO. 99444/LN-901/LNP-901 0905
Base: Synthetic rubber & resin
Type: Solvent
Color: Tan
Appearance: Smooth
Application Temperature:
40° to 100° F (5° to 38° C)
Service Temperature:
-20° to 140° F (-29° to 60° C)
Adhesion: Excellent
Consistency: Short buttery
Bridging Ability: Excellent
Extrudability: Easy
Shear Strength:
24 hours – 225 psi
48 hours – 300 psi
7 days – >425 psi
Durability: Excellent; 20 year life
Flexibility: Excellent
Water Resistance: Excellent
Exterior Weathering: Very good;
adhesive not recommended
for direct exposure to sunlight
Odor: Mild solvent
Working Time: 10 minutes
Weight Per Gallon: 9.4 pounds (1.12 kg/l)
Viscosity: 230,000 CPS
Volatiles: 35%
Solids: 65%
Flammability: Extremely flammable;
nonflammable when dry
Flash Point: 1°F (-17°C)
Coverage:
30 lineal ft. using 1/4" bead for 10 fl.oz.;
85 lineal ft. using 1/4" bead for 28 fl.oz.
Shelf Life: 12 months from date of purchase
Specifications: Exceeds ASTM C-557
MAX VOC: 401 GPL
LN-901/LNP-901

at which point my question is
if its got a shelf life of 12 months why isnt there a expiration date or a manufactured date on the tube or the box it came in
and yes I did notice the stuff seemed to have separated some with there being brief areas where the glue seemed more viscus than usual
thus the need for multiple test subjects

oh
and looks like Ill let the stuff dry for 7 days before I start boiling it
although I did just notice the twenty year life span
not nearly enough
course whats the life span of epoxy ?

well that was interesting
west system is strangely quiet on the life span of there product

 

Have used TB3 a lot and have great confidence in it, but I still prefer epoxy below waterline. TB3 likes plenty of pressure, epoxy likes just a little pressure, in my experience. Unlike epoxy TB3 does not fill gaps, at least with any kind of security. I tested TB3 and found it stronger than the wood when dry, but it doesn't penetrate and key-in as much as epoxy so when the wood is saturated and weakens keying strength is lost and the remaiing molecular bond strength may not be sufficient to hold. Full strength seems to return when the wood dries out. I have also used PL with success; it will expand to fill the joint but its strength is reduced sharply. TB3 is pretty useless on end grain, epoxy will hold but will break before the wood; haven't tried PL on end grain.

I have developed building methods and modified designs as necessary to allow me to make as many of the joints as possible while the wood is flat, to assure a good fitting joint and allow distributed pressure to be applied. Usually only the joints on the bottom plank or the bilge planks (whichever goes on last) are exposed to water continuously, I shift to epoxy there but still endeavour to get a perfectly fitted joint.

I have used these glues on softwood and marine ply exclusively so far, building canoes with no fasteners at all. That is about to change as I start on my first sailboat build. I don't (yet) trust TB3 on hardwood, and I have found flat surface joints made with any glue can fail due to shock and peeling forces, therefore I will use fasteners as reinforcement when fastening ply. For reinforcing joints between solid wood I use screws to apply pressure then exchange them for dowels, which I find adds shock resistance to a joint: the same thing is undoubtedly achieved by mortising.

I encourage the use of TB3, it is nice to use, easy to clean up and relatively cheap, but it is not a 100% substitute for epoxy.

I have never had a TB3 glued joint failure, it's always been the wood that failed first, so I haven't encountered a problem gluing to it, but I can't imagine wanting to glue to old glue without cleaning the joint off thoroughly.

 

one thing T2/3 has over everything else is its rated for food contact
course so WAS epoxy until folks started looking into the Bysphenol leaching question
ask Canada

just spoke to the West people and they recommend G-flex part # 655 as being best suited for my application
so now to await its arrival and test it as well
they do not know the lifespan of the product but instead suggest its been used for aprox 30 years without any trouble
anyone wonder why I do not trust the oil and gas/ chemical companies
Ill be using it to augment joints that would be able to stick with or without glue

Hey Mr Kayaker did you ever use that pl bellow the line and if so how well did it hold up and for how long

best
B

has anyone ever diagonal planked a hull without slathering it all with glue

 

Boston: Yes I used PL in a hull but only once, on an ama for a sailing canoe. It worked but did not get a real good testing, although the canoe+ama was moored in the water for a few days. No ill effects, that might have been a good varnish job but it only had 3 coats.

When I took it home and ritually demolished it I found it hard to believe how tough it was. It was about 7ft x 7" square and made from cheap door skin (1/8" luan ply) with 3/8" sq chine logs and a couple of ply bulkheads consisting of 90% holes. First I put concrete blocks under each end and stood on it: didn't creak so I repeatedly jumped on it: ditto, it felt stiffer than most house floors. So my buddy and I both stood on it, about 425 lb total: no effect. So I took a two-handed axe to it, that bounced off the chine though it did take a nick out of the corner; nearly took a nick out of me as I wasn't expecting that.

In the end I had to saw the damned thing up to get it to fit in the garbage. It was very clear that the wood failed before the glue but luan is not much of a test. If PL was a bit cheaper I might do more with it. There's a problem I have using it, it wants to expand so thin ply has to be clamped every 3 inches or so.

 

well the stuff says it holds 425 lbs per sq inch
which means I dont have enough weights to do the kind of test I was hoping to
basically I have a joint of aprox 3 sq in so Ild need 1275 lbs to hang from each joint

nice move with the ax
Im sure that bounce effect has resulted in more than a few quick trips to the ER
although a friend of mine is a ER doctor and you would not believe some of the brilliant things that land folks in the room

a few days in the water is not enough
I want this thing to outlive the kids and then some
sound as the day it was built

Im going to use glue kinda sparingly but what glue I use I want to last
this business about the epoxy people not wanting to say how long the stuff lasts is kinda a crock if you ask me
they know exactly how long it lasts and if it was all that spectacular they would be singing it out loud and clear
my bet is its got some kind of exponential decay rate or something equally as tragic for those who have learned to depend on it

Im still curious about a bellow waterline glue that will stick for a hundred years

what ever happened to pine pitch
if they could keep pine tar gooey it would work just fine
only trouble with old school Oakum is it dries out and crumbles

 

Good for you. I look forward to the results. I think, by the way, that shelf life is evident, but you don't know until you try to squeeze it out and it is like tar. I have used it for years for subfloors, and it can't be stored for too long.

 

I'm surprised the damned thing didn't crawl back out of the garbage and reassemble itself while you were sleeping.

 

Boston,
In my testing, while I did not use the kind of diagnostic equipment to quantify the forces at which the glues failed, I can at least advise you with confidence and true sincerity, not to use PL below the water line. This adhesive actually fell apart on its own on the test tank (fresh water). That's scary enough for me. Both R and TIII required "much" static force and impulsive force (impact strength) to make fail. This is a great thread and I think my final contribution is to suggest that you drift, bolt or screw LWL and beneath keel members with bedding compound. If you want assurance that an adhesive will outlast you, then you will spend the rest of your life testing, right? There is such a thing as accelerated life cycle testing but the classic test proceedure really doesn't mimic the real passage of time, it just rapidly cycles temp/RH/ loads. Go with what we all read in most boatbuilding books and which you already have confidence in and are good at; proven joinery, high level of craftsmanship, and fasteners (Though I know you perfer 'all wood' which I also like in concept) with a non-hardening compound at faying surfaces below LWL and whatever adhesive you find works well in your own testing, above. Just my two cents.

 

been using all wood fasteners and nice snug fitting joints for years and years and I say its what made those old ships from previous centuries last so well.
Old Ironsides is still floating today, not likely to see that with a fiberglass build two hundred years from today but it sure was common in that era of building even in boats that were getting hit with 12lb cannon fire. The epoxy people are all proud of themselves cause one boat from 30 years ago is still floating, wow, stop the presses. how many of the old time sailing ships are still floating today after well over a hundred years, and many after several hundred years, almost every major port has one. England cant find enough room for all the old timers they have. I sailed in the bicentennial tall ships race and it had at least a dozen tall ships well over a hundred years old.
I think its reasonable to expect no less than what our ancestors were capable of and maybe if Im lucky make a few improvements.

Ill take your word on the pl sounds like you know your business but Ill still boil up a few and see what floats just for fun

not sure why Im thinking of testing the epoxy, seems like we all agree it works even if for an unspecified period of time

sounds like what I should do is test a few timbers

say 4x8 nominal each 8'
scarfed in the middle
one with my favorite keyed hook scarf at dead center and pinned
one with a typical scarf and bolted

Ill most likely end up using epoxy to bed the pins but I got this ingrained idea that its joinery not glue that holds things together
basically if it isnt broke, dont fix it

my theory
when a joint fails its often because of differences in flexibility between the fasteners and the surrounding material which creates a focal point for stress, without that focal point; as in an all wood joint, the pressure is more evenly distributed and the material more evenly loaded. Done properly an all wood joint should, over time,outperform a bolted one. ( now that will cause a ruckus )

Thing is time is the key factor. A new joint hasn't had the time it takes to adversely affect the metal fasteners like we all know it does. An all wood joint should be able to handle more than adequate stresses for longer periods of time than a joint that depends on glue and bolts.

My two cents; and it does kinda put my head on the chopping block to say it but modern methods suck, they were devised for profitability not longevity.

I like the idea that this thread proposed that basic experimentation by the folks actually doing the work is key to understanding the various materials qualifications. I implicitly distrust any industry that brings us Dioxin, PCB and co2 claiming its good for us.

Ill take my timbers up to CU materials lab
they got a press up there that will work perfectly

so whats up with glue
did we just come to the conclusion that even though no one has any clue how long epoxy lasts its still the glue of choice

 

You raise some good points, Boston, though I have my own reasons for not using, say, trunnels on my current kayak build. Number one on the list is the bigger hole weakens the piece being attached. Two, while the trunnel if the same wood ought to shrink and expand the same as the base piece, the grain direction is still creating a situation similar to the screw, that is, wood expansion is not mirrored in the direction of the trunnels length. Three, no positive lock exists short of friction, so gluing is necessary, and if a tight fit is considered a means of locking, there is the problem of creating a new force that acts to put the attaqched piece in tension, a tendancy to split if too tightly done.
On the other hand, planking such as carvel would tend to self-bolster the planking against splitting, and so that application would sometimes be ideal.
Regarding epoxy, I agree that toxicity is a big negative. I had a kid in my shop the other day and he said, "Wow! It smells good in here!".
That's how I want my work environment to smell.
I'm interested in any method that is strong and long lasting and also is pleasant and safe to do. One under-utilized method, I believe, is lashing wood parts together. In the old days, I'm sure no known lashing material could have lasted long. Sinew, rope, twine, etc., all rot readily. Nowadays, skin on frame kayaks are lashed in the old way but nobody would think of using gut except on a museum piece. They use synthetic thread or artificial sinew as it's called. Nobody (almost) thought to apply this to larger boats but why not? No other method leaves the parts as whole and therefore strong as wrapping something around to hold them together. And imagine repairing something that need only be cut with a sharp knife and the pieces fall apart.
I myself used copper nails on a kayak I'm building and while they are strong I would have used lashings but for the speed difference. Next time I may use lashings anyway. Done correctly, with good tension, lashings in conjunction with pegs seems to overcome the tension splitting mentioned.
We're left, thyen, with the glue used to keep pegs secure, which ought not to dissolve if submerged for a while. I like the gap-filling but not the messiness of gorilla type glues, and now I am thinking also about T3, but epoxy, while ideal for many purposes not related to how I want to work, is far too inconvenient for most small gluing jobs.
Regarding screws, I use them a lot but I'm interested in going to trunnels where practical.

 

having no particular experience with marine glues other than the occasional run in ages ago with resourcenol or epoxy I am surprised that there is no great improvements in the field

cloth covering eh
never really tried it but those old kayaks sure are cool

a few tricks to pinning
moisture content and temp
the pin should go in cold and dry as can be
the stock we would cut pins from was kept out in the sun for a few days to dry it out more than the wood its going to be set in
makes a big difference in sticking power
also for white oak about 1/64 over on the pins in a half inch hole seems to be about right assuming your gluing the pins in then I typically go with three longitudinal flat spots on each pin for glue relief
if you dont flute the pins your only getting about half the holding power of the glue and the pressure will only serve to raise the pin, also that 1/64 might be a little to much. if you use factory made dowels your really screwing yourself because they turn the flutes (its easier and more profitable I guess ) in the wrong direction which weakens the pin, also those pins are typically pine, weak already and so you will lose more pins before you get em successfully driven home. Also those pins tend to be cut metric and all my titanium bits that I dowel with are SAE, so good luck with that.

its not just the pressure of an unglued pin that holds it in, its the fibers; if you dont over compress it, that do something with the transfer of moisture that seems to kinda bind em a little, Im not sure exactly how it works but after a few years a properly prepared and set pin is impossible to get out. On planking the oak pins in oak frames never had any trouble sticking and the ceder swells so much it grips the pin with a death grip and there is no getting it apart after its been in the water for a few years, if your dealing with thin planking a tapered head on the pin is a nice touch and although it takes forever to turn out a zillion pins, it works really well.

gluing pins is an art in itself
when I glue pins I lather the pin with glue and also drip some into the hole ( I been using T2 and 3 but thats not going to work on my boat build )
the wrong glue like pl will only heave the pin right back out of the hole, never tried gorilla glue
epoxy seems to work ok but I wonder about its longevity or even the need for it in the first place in a pin that has historically already proven itself over hundreds of years
never tried Res. glue in a pin hole but I might who knows although Res definitely seems to have a life span
hmmmm
anyone know the life span of Resourcinol ( Im sure I spelled that wrong )
formaldehyde based glue if I remember
mmmm yummy formaldehyde

I been reading up on Black Locust wood and it seems its been traditionally used to pin white oak for centuries
news to me
Ill have to give it a try

 

One usually says to himself, "this boat should be built to last for...", and that determines what's done to get it to last that long. in the old days, iron fasteners were fine because other issues would kill the boat by the time the iron expanded and split the ribs.
There is, I think, elegance in such thinking. The highest and best level of boat construction was a comprimise between a number of factors. Initial cost, long term cost, longevity, availability of materials, availability of trained boatwrights, cosmetics (end use as a work boat or a pleasure boat?), and God knows what else.
Each situation differed. No one way was best, only the best under the circumstances.
Nowadays, we can spend a lot more time on details that would have been overkill to our ancestors. We sand when a spoke-shaved finish would do. We look at very long term lifespans, use products that are expensive like epoxy and cloth and marine plywood.
I tend to be moving towards "Good usable servive life" of thirty years if maintained and far less if not. I don't include painting or occasional caulking. I'd never expect those things to last much over five to seven years at best.
i drive home a screw and try to imagine it years later. I think we all do. When I am able to imagine it having lasted about thirty years of regular but caring use, I'm okay with that. A yacht of 30 feet might warrant looking sixty years down the line (but with some major resoration at times along the way.
Wood alone appears to have the best chance of lasting, though bronze fasteners are very long-lived. I've heard of hulls built with carvel and wedged seams (same wood) that lasted for a very long time if well stored or better, kept year round in cold salt water.
George Buehler may have the most practical solution with his lumber yard designs. You can't go sailing if you can't afford a boat to begin with.

 

I am sure that the old timers would very quickly have taken to using modern glues if they had been available back then, but they would have had reservations.

The great thing about a glued joint is, the joint is continuous for the entire length. The joint matches the full strength of the wood resulting in great hull integrity. In effect the hull becomes a single piece of complexly curved wood. This is in contrast with a joint using fasteners where the strength is concentrated at the fastener locations. The fasteners are stronger than the wood they are put into, but the wood has to be thicker to accept the fasteners and distribute strain from the fastener locations into the rest of the wood. Thus glued wood construction can be far lighter. Nothing new here.

There is another side to the coin however; the thicker members used in traditionally built boats flex less. Flexing in a lightly built hull can allow stress concentration to occur under some circumstances, with the potential for local joint failure. Because a glued joint relatively poor resistance to peeling it can then basically unzip along much of its length, resulting in catastrophic failure rather than a simple leak.

Strategically-located fasteners can prevent that. A fastener may loosen without letting go, whereas when glue fails it no longer holds. The downside of fasteners is, if they are stressed in normal use rather than just sitting there as a backup to a glued joint, they can work loose, so they require maintenance.

As mentioned before, I happily build ultra-light canoes relying entirely on glued joints but I would not do that for a larger boat. A small, undecked canoe lacks the freeboard and stability to handle heavy sea conditions so it is not designed to withstand wave forces, and other stresses are mild due to low speed and the fact that the driving forces are distributed by the paddler’s body. They are largely maintenance free although I do not glass them, because their wood members do not flex, the joints are not worked, and the paint and varnish film retains its integrity so water does not penetrate.