Titebond III Does not Perform

[CW]

What you say is true but the testing conditions used are no less precise than most of the junk science that is so common.

[Leon]

Well yeah...that is reasonable but what do you do in the mean time? You have to go with the test results available and what Franklyn "actualy uses" as the definition of Water Proof.

Yes... so you have to compare the two glues and see which has the most strength in those type aplications involving water. Common knoledge defines Water Proof as not being affected by water. From the "get go" the TiteBond label is misleading to a majority of woodworkers. You and I no longer fall within that group as we now know that the TiteBonds Water Proof label is not defined by the common knowledge definition.

That's right. You cannot use the common definition of Water Proof to back up you decision of which one to use.

I agree, but so far the TB2 has shown to be better than TB3 in at least one test. ;~) The information at Titebonds site certainly does not back up TB3 as being superior to TB2.

Its a tough choice. Consider this. You know how a higher priced same brand item is usually equated as better. I bet Franklin is betting most people will equate this the same way also. If the TB3 glue was the same price as TB2, would you think it was superior to TB2 knowing that it is truely not water proof? I think we are witnessing a way for Franklin to market a product with about the same qualities for a higher price.

[Leon]

I think what Edwin is indicating here is that the WaterProof label in this instance should be clarified on the bottle front label as not really being water proof as a common person would define it and that it is more of a description of the ANSI spec.

[Edwin Pawlowski]

Right, Leon.

I just took an unscientific poll from a group of one person. I asked my wife about the glue from what she saw on the label.

Would you use the TB3 for outdoor furniture? Yes

Would you use the TB3 for a boat or pool device? Yes

Showed her the label of TB2 and asked the same questions. Answer was yes, no. The difference being waterproof versus water resistant.

I then asked her to read the back of the label. What is the ANSI spec? Of course she had no idea as do most of us at least until this discussion made me look it up. Ed

[Leon]

I believe that Franklin is using smoke and mirrors here. ;~)

[J T]

Sun, Jul 11, 2004, 9:26am [e-mail] (J.=A0Clarke) says: You've clearly never owned a wooden boat. They leak like sieves until the planking takes up enough water to swell and tighten the seams down onto the caulking.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know, that's why buckets were invented. I know, there's boats been made, and some "still" made, with NO caulking, no glue, and not painted. And yeah, some outdoor furniture isn't painted, or finished. You seem to take it as a given that I don't know about any of that. Well, yeah, I do know about it - and none of it was the point.

You missed the point, which was about the glue.

By the way, a well made wooden boat doesn't "need" to leak.

And, with my attitude, you won't have to worry about getting invited for a ride in any boat I make. LMAO

Making a success of the job at hand is the best step toward the kind you want.

- Bernard M. Baruch More likely, your boss gets a raise and/or promotion, from getting credit for your work.

- JOAT

[J T]

Sun, Jul 11, 2004, 3:25pm (EDT+4) [e-mail] (Leon) asks: Not Continuiously submerged could mean less than 1 week or 2 weeks, or 1 day. Who knows?

I do, I do. LMAO

Based on an article I read some time in the past, and forget the article, and where I read it, I think the "usual" meaning, is for a boat taken out of the water after each use, and stored dry. Trailer it to the water, use it, trailer it back home, and let it sit until the next time. Sounds like a reasonable enough interpretation to me.

However, you'd have to be careful to keep the boat well covered while sitting, to keep rain out of it. Fresh water (rain) getting to the wood, would not be good. However, some people keep a few cloth bags of salt in the bilges (bottom) of their boat, because salt water won't rot wood. I think that's used mosely in small sail boats. Sounds like a pretty good idea tho, just in case.

Making a success of the job at hand is the best step toward the kind you want.

- Bernard M. Baruch More likely, your boss gets a raise and/or promotion, from getting credit for your work.

- JOAT

[David]

why are you taking it on faith that the new and "improved" glue is really better than the TBII? "New" isn't always better. If an independent test shows poor performance, I see no logic in expecting the testers to disregard the results and give a product more chances.

Edwin Pawlowski wrote: I have to imagine that Franklin would have

[J. Clarke]

Actually, glue as a structural material in the construction of wooden boats is a very recent innovation and you'll find darned few other than cold-molded that use it to hold together anything that takes any kind of load.

But your assertions with regard to the glue were that some kind of protective coating would always be used, and that is simply not the case. The correct solution is not to rely on paint to keep the glue dry, the correct solution is to use a glue that doesn't need to be kept dry, or even better, a construction that doesn't depend on glue to maintain its structural integrity.

Unless you're using cold-molded ply, it's going to leak. If it appears not to be then look for what's absorbing the water and make sure that it's not about to split your hull wide open (rice was a nasty cargo in the days of sail for that reason).

That's OK, I would have turned down the offer anyway. I'm crazy, but not _that_ crazy.

[Edwin Pawlowski]

If you go beyond the water tests, TB# did out perform the TB2.

Besides, it is more expensive so it must be better. Right? Ed

[J T]

Sun, Jul 11, 2004, 5:40pm [e-mail] (J.=A0Clarke) put out: Actually, glue as a structural material in the construction of wooden boats is a very recent innovation and you'll find darned few other than cold-molded that use it to hold together anything that takes any kind of load.

Glue, structural material? I wouldn't call it a "structural material". I'd call it a fasener. Chemical fastener, rather than a mechanical fastener, such as a peg, or nail. Also, you don't define "very recent". Actually, adhesives of various types have been used for a long time in different types of boatbuilding, and in various cultures. And, yeah, theres a lot more than just cold-molded that use it. But, I don't think cold-molded boats use an awful lot of Titebond, I'm reasonably sure they use epoxy - along with fibreglass cloth. In this case, I define "a long time" as hundreds of years. This doesn't come right out and say "glue", but here's a reference circa 1717.

if you want to go a bit further back, here's a quote: "Adhesives are not a recent development but have been in use throughout history.=A0 From the Romans that caulked their ships with beeswax and wood tar to the Egyptians that used gum from the acacia tree and egg glue." from here: withing the last year, I read an article that claimed cavemen developed some sort of epoxy glue. Don't know about that one, but who knows?

But your assertions with regard to the glue were that some kind of protective coating would always be used, and that is simply not the case. The correct solution is not to rely on paint to keep the glue dry, the correct solution is to use a glue that doesn't need to be kept dry, or even better, a construction that doesn't depend on glue to maintain its structural integrity.

What you claim was an assertion, was what I said in regards to a real-life type test, and this is what I said. "Of course it matters. To start with, if the wood wasn't painted, epoxied, or some type of protection, it's pretty well meaningless as far as I'm concerned. How many people re going to make a boat, then not paint it? Or, make a lawn chair, and leave it out in a driving rain without paint? Not too many."

Unless you're using cold-molded ply, it's going to leak. If it appears not to be then look for what's absorbing the water and make sure that it's not about to split your hull wide open (rice was a nasty cargo in the days of sail for that reason).

I'll remember that next time I sail over for a load of rice. I did say a "well-made" wooden boat doesn't need to leak. You seem to be talking about a wooden boat that's been damaged, and not repaired, or not well made; and yeah, I know of expensive boats, made with a balsa wood core, that sucks up water without anyone knowing - I also know their fibreglass sheathing was damaged, and not inspected, allowing leaks. Even a well-made boat can leak in that case. But, if a leaky boat makes you happy, no prob. The epoxy and fibreglass is what keeps cold-molded boats from leaking, a lot of times that's what holds them together. Long ago, the Boy Scouts had plans for a canoe, made out of

2X2s, I believe, orange crate slats, and then covered with canvas, and that painted. I never made one, but understand they didn't leak. So, I'd call that well made. A lot of (expensive) wooden canoes are still made in a similar manner, and their owners would be extremely peeved if they leaked. But, maybe all the boats and canoes I just cited were all cold molded, and nobody realized it.

For what it's worth, I am planning on at least one boat. But, no worries about it sinking, even if it were to leak. It'll have enough floatation, it wouldn't matter if I chainsawed a hole in the bottom, it'll still float. Plywood boat, caulk, glue, nails, fibreglass, epoxy, paint, I'm not worried about it leaking.

But, the original subject was a glue test, and I didn't think it was a realistic test. And, still don't.

Making a success of the job at hand is the best step toward the kind you want.

- Bernard M. Baruch More likely, your boss gets a raise and/or promotion, from getting credit for your work.

- JOAT

[J. Clarke]

If you want to call it a fastener, then consider that the performance of glue ranges from that of a strand of spaghetti on up.

So which cultures build ocean-crossing vessels that depended on glue to maintain their structural integrity?

Not to maintain primary structural integrity.

Epoxy in some cases, resorcinol in others. And while it is possible to fiberglass over a cold-molded hull, that is not a necessary part of the process.

_very_ loosely. Any source that equates caulking of wooden ships with adhesive bonding is at best questionable.

And what kind of boats did he glue together with it?

Please explain how that statement is different from an assertion that some kind of protective coating will always be used in glued construction.

If you consider the ships of the United States Navy to be "not well made" then perhaps your assertion might hold some validity.

I wasn't talking about frozen snot, I was talking about wood.

What leads you to believe that cold molded construction involves fiberglass? If you believe that either fiberglass or epoxy is a necessary part of the process then you have been very sadily misinformed. Cold molded construction requires veneer, a waterproof adhesive, a mold, and some means of applying pressure during cure--that might involve a two-part mold or a vacuum bag or some other process. There is no fiberglass involved and epoxy is not the best adhesive to use for the purpose.

Commonplace canoe construction.

If you put fasteners through the canvas then it leaked until the wood swelled. Unlike you, I _have_ owned such a canoe.

Very few canoes are in the water long enough at a time for seepage to be an issue. Take that same canoe and tie it up at a marina and leave it there for a year and you'll find water in the bilge even if it's kept under cover so no rain gets in. You seem to think that one either has a leak that sinks the boat or one has a dry bilge. The truth is in between.

Why would you need to caulk a plywood boat? However I think I'm beginning to see part of the problem. I suspect that you when you see the word "caulk" associate it with a product that you buy in a tube at Home Depot. That is not the sort of caulk that the Romans were using or the sort of caulk that the US Navy, the Royal Navy, the British East India Company, the Spanish Armada, or any of numerous other outfits that were famed for being able to go anywhere they wanted to any time they wanted to in wooden ships propelled by wind would be using. And that type of caulk is not used in the seams of modern boats either--the caulking is structural and must be driven into place with a mallet, a use to which such products are not amenable. When I think of a boat I don't think of something that sits on a trailer most of the time and gets towed down to the launching ramp to go fishing, I think of something that is launched once and stays in the water until it becomes necessary to remove it to clean the bottom or to prevent damage from ice, which vessel can when sufficient quantities of food and water are put aboard be aimed east and sailed until one bumps into Europe. The realities of such vessels are considerably different from the realities of trailer-boats.

And I still don't think it's realistic to depend on paint to keep the glue dry.

[J T]

Mon, Jul 12, 2004, 3:42am [e-mail] (J.=A0Clarke) who says: If you want to call it a fastener, then consider that the performance of glue ranges from that of a strand of spaghetti on up.

If it's so bad, why'd you call it structural material?

So which cultures build ocean-crossing vessels that depended on glue to maintain their structural integrity?

Noah.

's more.

Not to maintain primary structural integrity.

See Noah.

Epoxy in some cases, resorcinol in others. And while it is possible to fiberglass over a cold-molded hull, that is not a necessary part of the process.

Fibreglass would be for me. It would help keep the bottom from abrading. I'm not taking about some sail boat or something, I'm talking about a boat that'll be run up on shore, in shallow water, in other words, used.

Caulking does not depend on any kind of adhesive unless you define the term _very_ loosely. Any source that equates caulking of wooden ships with adhesive bonding is at best questionable.

You might want to tell the British that. Their traditional method of caulking was oakum, then pine tar.

And what kind of boats did he glue together with it?

Didn't ask.

Please explain how that statement is different from an assertion that some kind of protective coating will always be used in glued construction.

Don't have to. I never said a couting would always be used.

If you consider the ships of the United States Navy to be "not well made" then perhaps your assertion might hold some validity.

Last I'd heard, most of them are now made out of steel.

I wasn't talking about frozen snot, I was talking about wood.

An unpainted, glued together boat?

What leads you to believe that cold molded construction involves fiberglass?

Mostly because I've read articles on people builting cold-molded boats that wanted them to a last a long, long time, without major maintenance.

If you believe that either fiberglass or epoxy is a necessary part of the process then you have been very sadily misinformed. Cold molded construction requires veneer, a waterproof adhesive, a mold,

No it doesn't. It does require thin wood, which can be strips. Watrproof adhesive, yeah that's best, but partly depends on usage, which you seem to ignore. A mold isn't necessary, if you apply directly over an old hull - some people call that cold-molding, some don't. You probably don't.

and some means of applying pressure during cure--that might involve a two-part mold or a vacuum bag or some other process.

Staples, or tacks will work.

There is no fiberglass involved and epoxy is not the best adhesive to use for the purpose.

Depends on who's doing it. There is more than one way.

Commonplace canoe construction.

Orange crate slats commonplace canoe construction?

If you put fasteners through the canvas then it leaked until the wood swelled. Unlike you, I _have_ owned such a canoe. Apparently you had a cheap canoe. I did say the Boy Scouts painted their canoes. And, the canvas canoes aren't made just by tacking canvas on, the canvas is protected with a coating - which makes the canoe waterproof. They don't need to have the wood swell so they won't leak.

Very few canoes are in the water long enough at a time for seepage to be an issue. Take that same canoe and tie it up at a marina and leave it there for a year and you'll find water in the bilge even if it's kept under cover so no rain gets in.

So? Condensation would do that.

You seem to think that one either has a leak that sinks the boat or one has a dry bilge. The truth is in between.

Do you think so?

Why would you need to caulk a plywood boat?

Well gee, I thought I'd either do that to piss you off, or to keep it from leaking.

However I think I'm beginning to see part of the problem. I suspect that you when you see the word "caulk" associate it with a product that you buy in a tube at Home Depot.

Ah, I see part of the problem. You think I don't know what caulk is. Well, I do. However, what I would use to caulk a plywood boat with, would indeed come in a tube. But, I don't sink so low as to shop at Home Depot.

That is not the sort of caulk that the Romans were using or the sort of caulk that the US Navy, the Royal Navy, the British East India Company, the Spanish Armada, or any of numerous other outfits that were famed for being able to go anywhere they wanted to any time they wanted to in wooden ships propelled by wind would be using. And that type of caulk is not used in the seams of modern boats either--the caulking is structural and must be driven into place with a mallet, a use to which such products are not amenable.

You left out that a "caulking iron" also has to be used in the process. I've already told you, I already know that, see somewhere up above about the oakum and pine tar. Wooden boats were often sheathed in sheet copper too, particularly war ships. So what? All sorts of things have been tried for caulking wooden boats, even horse manure. Again, so what?

When I think of a boat I don't think of something that sits on a trailer most of the time and gets towed down to the launching ramp to go fishing, I think of something that is launched once and stays in the water until it becomes necessary to remove it to clean the bottom or to prevent damage from ice,

Well now, you didn't say before, did you?

which vessel can when sufficient quantities of food and water are put aboard be aimed east and sailed until one bumps into Europe.

Well, that would be presuming it was in the Atlantic Ocean. Wouldn't work in the Pacific Ocean, or on a lake.

The realities of such vessels are considerably different from the realities of trailer-boats.

Gee, I am enlightened. I thought they were exacly the same.

And I still don't think it's realistic to depend on paint to keep the glue dry.

What is realistic is the fact that if someone makes a boat (a big boat, that can sail to Europe, if it's in the Atlantic ocean, and has enough food and water), that they're going to put paint on it. Or some kind of protective finish, unless maybe they've got a teak deck. Bottom paint is made specifically to put on the bottom of boats in sea water, to prevent under water growth, also called anti-fouling paint. But, maybe you won't paint the bottom, because you don't want to keep your glue dry.

On my income, I'll make a boat out of plywood, put it on a trailer, take it fishing, then trailer it back home, and enjoy the hell out of it. It'll probablyy be caulked with butyl caulk, probably from Ace Hardware, or Wal-Mart, fastened with glue and nails, fibreglassed along the seams and bottom, and painted with latex paint. As long as it works for me, I really don't give a damn about anyone else and what they've got.

I haven't had a lot to keep me occupied this weekend, and it's been fun, but you're just getting too silly. You're starting to sound like some of the officers I've worked for - "I know that's what I said, but that's not what I meant".

Making a success of the job at hand is the best step toward the kind you want.

- Bernard M. Baruch More likely, your boss gets a raise and/or promotion, from getting credit for your work.

- JOAT

[Leon]

Glue, structural material? I wouldn't call it a "structural material". I'd call it a fasener. Chemical fastener, rather than a mechanical fastener, such as a peg, or nail.

Yes, glues are structural materials. In fact TB 3 has limitations to not be used in load bearing or structural projects. TB2 does not have that limitation. Automotive wind shields and back glass is held in with a structural adhesive and or glue. Many GM minivans used structural ahdhesives and glues to bond the body panels together.

Also, you don't define "very recent". Actually, adhesives of various types have been used for a long time in different types of boatbuilding, and in various cultures. And, yeah, theres a lot more than just cold-molded that use it. But, I don't think cold-molded boats use an awful lot of Titebond, I'm reasonably sure they use epoxy - along with fibreglass cloth. In this case, I define "a long time" as hundreds of years. This doesn't come right out and say "glue", but here's a reference circa 1717.

if you want to go a bit further back, here's a quote: "Adhesives are not a recent development but have been in use throughout history. From the Romans that caulked their ships with beeswax and wood tar to the Egyptians that used gum from the acacia tree and egg glue." from here: withing the last year, I read an article that claimed cavemen developed some sort of epoxy glue. Don't know about that one, but who knows?

But your assertions with regard to the glue were that some kind of protective coating would always be used, and that is simply not the case. The correct solution is not to rely on paint to keep the glue dry, the correct solution is to use a glue that doesn't need to be kept dry, or even better, a construction that doesn't depend on glue to maintain its structural integrity.

What you claim was an assertion, was what I said in regards to a real-life type test, and this is what I said. "Of course it matters. To start with, if the wood wasn't painted, epoxied, or some type of protection, it's pretty well meaningless as far as I'm concerned. How many people re going to make a boat, then not paint it? Or, make a lawn chair, and leave it out in a driving rain without paint? Not too many."

Unless you're using cold-molded ply, it's going to leak. If it appears not to be then look for what's absorbing the water and make sure that it's not about to split your hull wide open (rice was a nasty cargo in the days of sail for that reason).

I'll remember that next time I sail over for a load of rice. I did say a "well-made" wooden boat doesn't need to leak. You seem to be talking about a wooden boat that's been damaged, and not repaired, or not well made; and yeah, I know of expensive boats, made with a balsa wood core, that sucks up water without anyone knowing - I also know their fibreglass sheathing was damaged, and not inspected, allowing leaks. Even a well-made boat can leak in that case. But, if a leaky boat makes you happy, no prob. The epoxy and fibreglass is what keeps cold-molded boats from leaking, a lot of times that's what holds them together. Long ago, the Boy Scouts had plans for a canoe, made out of

2X2s, I believe, orange crate slats, and then covered with canvas, and that painted. I never made one, but understand they didn't leak. So, I'd call that well made. A lot of (expensive) wooden canoes are still made in a similar manner, and their owners would be extremely peeved if they leaked. But, maybe all the boats and canoes I just cited were all cold molded, and nobody realized it.

For what it's worth, I am planning on at least one boat. But, no worries about it sinking, even if it were to leak. It'll have enough floatation, it wouldn't matter if I chainsawed a hole in the bottom, it'll still float. Plywood boat, caulk, glue, nails, fibreglass, epoxy, paint, I'm not worried about it leaking.

But, the original subject was a glue test, and I didn't think it was a realistic test. And, still don't.

Making a success of the job at hand is the best step toward the kind you want.

- Bernard M. Baruch More likely, your boss gets a raise and/or promotion, from getting credit for your work.

- JOAT

[patrick conroy]

And my "WalMart" Loctite galoo faired very well. More proof that (once they start stocking Two Cherries) all you need is a 'Mart...

[Ron Magen]

Brian, Try epoxy.

If you buy a 'quart kit' of WEST Epoxy {by Gueogeon Brothers} from a local West Marine {NOT the same company}, it may seem expensive - due to the small quantity. HOWEVER, it has SO MANY uses and abilities you will probably wonder how you got along without it.

There are several 'mail order' sources as well. I use RAKA, from the company of the same name in Florida. I am a 'small user' and get quantities of 3 gallons at a time. Another good outfit is System Three - they have an EXCELLENT free booklet on the 'theory & practice' of using epoxies. Well worth contacting them for it.

Regards & Good Luck, Ron Magen Backyard Boatshop {PS - I also use Titebond II in many places where epoxy is either not necessary, or I want something to simply 'squirt, smear, & clamp'. I use it for the 'garden projects' & 'Nautically Themed' planters, etc. that stay outdoors throughout the year. I've yet to have a 'glue failure'. }

[Leon]

Check out the responses that I have received form Titebond regarding the tests.

Look under Titebond response from headquarters posted this morning.

[bridger]

thank you for taking the time to correspond with the folks at titebond. you might consider inviting the titebond rep to post directly to rec.woodworking. I have a couple of questions to ask and I'm sure others do as well. I think we're a big enough forum to warrant their attention....

[Jay Pique]

I agree with you Bridger, and I think it can be good for both parties. Seems to work with Rob Lee anyhow.

JP

[J T]

Mon, Jul 12, 2004, 1:25pm (EDT+4) [e-mail] (Leon) claims: Yes, glues are structural materials. structural adhesive and or glue. Many GM minivans used structural ahdhesives and glues to bond the body panels together.

Might as well call nails structural material then, they hold wood together. However, I note you were saying "structural adhesive", which doesn't compute as "structural material", to me So, I did some looking.

Came up with this: From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) (web1913) Fastener \Fas"ten*er\, n. One who, or that which, makes fast or firm.

This: From WordNet (r) 1.7 (wn) glue n : cement consisting of a sticky substance that is used as an adhesive

And, this: From WordNet (r) 1.7 (wn) adhesive adj : tending to adhere [ant: {nonadhesive}] n : a substance that unites or bonds surfaces together

And then I found this:

Seems to me that structural bonding is the term, not structural material.

I do accept glue, nails, rivets, whatever, as being part of a whole structural package, always have, always will, no prob. But, to call them structural material, I don't buy it. But, you come up with some legitimate proof(s) that says they are, and I might change my mind. Until then, I'll be saying fasteners, and structural bonding, my new term. LOL

Making a success of the job at hand is the best step toward the kind you want.

- Bernard M. Baruch More likely, your boss gets a raise and/or promotion, from getting credit for your work.

- JOAT