"joey" wrote in message
news:_sSHc.52254$a24.46262@attbi_s03...

Actually it might matter, true it failed this test but.. The test sounds
like a 1 time shock test and not repeated cycles of getting damp and
drying
out over and over.. that would normally be the case outside over time. One
glue could very well maintain its strength or atleast deteriorate at a
lesser rate and another glue wouldn't. Sorta like a sprinter vs a marathon
runner.

No glue really failed the test, so much as TB III was out performed by TB II
and TB III is suppose to be warer proof and TB II is not.
I thought about different senerios, but this was IMHO a worst case situation
for testing water resistance. The TB II certainly would do just as well on
a lessor test.

Materials in my line of work are tested by repeated exposure to
hot/cold/humidity cycles

The TB II should do even better in a test like that as it is labeled Weather
Resistent.

I haven't read the article I will get it I just glued up some outdoor bar
stools with TBIII and am curious. I choose it over GG because GG would be
hard to clean up in some of the tight areas, I did use GG for gluing up
the
seat blanks

TB III did so poorly compared to TB II in the area that it should have
shined. I really have suspicions that the article got the spec's on the
glues mixed up.