[Michael[_24_]]

I thought I would use your basic Titebond for this project, maybe coat the joints (mostly mortise and tenons) with acetone. But I read where other glues are preferable. What's the verdict?

Thanks,

Mike

[Leon[_7_]]

On 6/5/2018 10:57 AM, Michael wrote:
I thought I would use your basic Titebond for this project, maybe coat the joints (mostly mortise and tenons) with acetone. But I read where other glues are preferable. What's the verdict?

Thanks,

Mike


Titebond comes in many varieties. Some are called water proof, some
weather resistant, and indoor use. Gorilla glue also makes a variety of
wood glues not just polyurethane.

Keep in mind that if you are using wet cedar a polyurethane adhesive may
be the better choice.

[Sonny]

On Tuesday, June 5, 2018 at 10:57:07 AM UTC-5, Michael wrote:
I thought I would use your basic Titebond for this project, maybe coat the joints (mostly mortise and tenons) with acetone. But I read where other glues are preferable. What's the verdict?

Thanks,

Mike

Eastern Red Cedar? I've made benches, similar to the (link) pictured ones, that has been outside for years, with no problems. Titebond II was used..
https://www.flickr.com/photos/438361...posted-public/

One outside bench was looking so weathered I didn't want to refinish it, too much work. I gave it to a friend to refinish. Still solidly glued together.

I made Mom some cedar plant "stands" (stools?) - a slab with limbs glued onto the bottom. They held up for about 3 years, before needing repair/regluing.
Though this pictured plant stand is indoors, this is the basic construction of the outdoor stands.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/438361...posted-public/

On all these above projects, the holes drilled for the limb legs were fairly large, at least 1" diameter and fairly deep, as well. Hence, the beefy construction, along with gluing, made for their long term stability. *on some, the limb legs rotted before the joints fail, as the plants are watered and/or rained on.

Sonny

[[email protected]]

On Tue, 5 Jun 2018 08:57:04 -0700 (PDT), Michael
wrote:

I thought I would use your basic Titebond for this project, maybe coat the joints
(mostly mortise and tenons) with acetone. But I read where other glues are preferable.
What's the verdict?
Thanks,
Mike


The embedded link on this product page has some info
click on "Inst"

http://www.leevalley.com/en/Wood/pag...110,42965&ap=1

John T.

[Electric Comet]

On Tue, 5 Jun 2018 08:57:04 wrote:

I thought I would use your basic Titebond for this project, maybe
coat the joints (mostly mortise and tenons) with acetone. But I read
where other glues are preferable. What's the verdict?

that hf glue is great and it is not runny like titebond which might be
good for this application

[Leon[_7_]]

On 6/5/2018 11:25 AM, Sonny wrote:
On Tuesday, June 5, 2018 at 10:57:07 AM UTC-5, Michael wrote:
I thought I would use your basic Titebond for this project, maybe coat the joints (mostly mortise and tenons) with acetone. But I read where other glues are preferable. What's the verdict?

Thanks,

Mike

Eastern Red Cedar? I've made benches, similar to the (link) pictured ones, that has been outside for years, with no problems. Titebond II was used.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/438361...posted-public/
Believe it or not one of the magazines tested several years ago, 10 or
so years back. TBII proved to me more water resistant than TBIII.




One outside bench was looking so weathered I didn't want to refinish it, too much work. I gave it to a friend to refinish. Still solidly glued together.

I made Mom some cedar plant "stands" (stools?) - a slab with limbs glued onto the bottom. They held up for about 3 years, before needing repair/regluing.
Though this pictured plant stand is indoors, this is the basic construction of the outdoor stands.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/438361...posted-public/

On all these above projects, the holes drilled for the limb legs were fairly large, at least 1" diameter and fairly deep, as well. Hence, the beefy construction, along with gluing, made for their long term stability. *on some, the limb legs rotted before the joints fail, as the plants are watered and/or rained on.

Sonny

[dpb[_3_]]

On 6/6/2018 9:36 AM, Leon wrote:
....

Believe it or not one of the magazines tested several years ago, 10 or
so years back.Â* TBII proved to me more water resistant than TBIII.
....


Well, you have to understand what the ANSI tests are; ANSI Type I (TB3)
and ANSI Type II (TB2) are vastly different and neither is really all
that representative of normal weathering use. All one can really say
about the two products is that they pass the ANSI tests and so are
compliant to the Standard.

To qualify a glue to the ANSI Standard the procedure is to make some
birch plywood with three plies using the test adhesive for gluing the
veneers together.

For Type 1 test the 1" x 3" sample is
1) boiled in water for four hours
2) dried at 145F for 20 hours
3) boiled for four more hours
4) cooled immediately and tested wet for bond strength.

The strength test is a shear test trying to slide the veneers past each
other. The shear strength required and the amount of wood failure
versus glue failure is specified in the standard.

For the ANSI Type 2 test the 2" x 5" sample is
1) soaked in water (not boiled) for four hours
2) dried at 120 F for 19 hours
3) 1) & 2) repeated two more times, for a total of three cycles

To pass the test, the sample must not have delaminated; there is no
stress test, only that the joints are still intact.

One would have to know the specifics of the magazine's testing to be
able to judge and unless they followed a similar protocol to the ANSI
tests there's no real reason to expect much correlation.

--

[Electric Comet]

On Tue, 5 Jun 2018 08:57:04 wrote:

I thought I would use your basic Titebond for this project, maybe
coat the joints (mostly mortise and tenons) with acetone. But I read
where other glues are preferable. What's the verdict?

another option is to not use glue

get some nice hex head stainless bolts with nice washers and nuts

can even get some of those round head nuts

gives it a modern look but make sure to buy quality stainless

[Leon[_7_]]

On 6/6/2018 10:40 AM, dpb wrote:
On 6/6/2018 9:36 AM, Leon wrote:
...

Believe it or not one of the magazines tested several years ago, 10 or
so years back.Â* TBII proved to me more water resistant than TBIII.
...


Well, you have to understand what the ANSI tests are; ANSI Type I (TB3)
and ANSI Type II (TB2) are vastly different and neither is really all
that representative of normal weathering use.Â* All one can really say
about the two products is that they pass the ANSI tests and so are
compliant to the Standard.

Preaching to the choir. LOL. When that article came out I contacted a
TB rep and it was explained that the glues passed those particular
tests. No where in the description of the test standards are the words
"Water Proof" except in the title.




To qualify a glue to the ANSI Standard the procedure is to make some
birch plywood with three plies using the test adhesive for gluing the
veneers together.

For Type 1 test the 1" x 3" sample is
1) boiled in water for four hours
2) dried at 145F for 20 hours
3) boiled for four more hours
4) cooled immediately and tested wet for bond strength.

The strength test is a shear test trying to slide the veneers past each
other.Â* The shear strength required and the amount of wood failure
versus glue failure is specified in the standard.

For the ANSI Type 2 test the 2" x 5" sample is
1) soaked in water (not boiled) for four hours
2) dried at 120 F for 19 hours
3) 1) & 2) repeated two more times, for a total of three cycles

To pass the test, the sample must not have delaminated; there is no
stress test, only that the joints are still intact.

One would have to know the specifics of the magazine's testing to be
able to judge and unless they followed a similar protocol to the ANSI
tests there's no real reason to expect much correlation.

--

The magazine had a pretty detailed test and explanation. While I
understand the standards ratings the average buyer is going to look at
"Water Proof" on the label. The test standard that it passed would not
describe "Water Proof" in a way that a user would relate to.