On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 7:33:35 PM UTC-4, krw wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 14:06:04 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Thursday, August 11, 2016 at 6:02:49 PM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
On 08/11/2016 4:51 PM, Leon wrote:
...

Good to know. From what I understand past the suggested dates to use,
the thin glue on top is not compromised except for the fact that it will
have a shortened open time and if not mixed the remainder in the bottom
of the bottle will likely be to thick to use and or will have little
actual glue left. It is likely that if you are down to and only use the
part that has settled in the bottom that it may not be as strong.

Well, part of what I discovered and reported earlier was that simply
turning it upside down and letting thicker bottom layer glob it's way
back to the new bottom essentially reconstituted the whole mess back to
basically, afaict, indistinguishable from new product or what one would
get by actually stirring.

So, I had no separated layers used; it looks/acts essentially like new
product despite the age and the previously having separated...


I inverted my new bottle of TBIII (manufactured sometime this year) and it
seems to be a little thicker than before. Still not as thick as the 2014
bottle of TBII, but I need the open time so I'm going to hang on to it.

I did do a quick test of the TBIII. I glued a ripped edge of a scrape to
the face of another and let it dry overnight. The result of the hammer
blow follows...

http://i.imgur.com/JnpgHxx.jpg

There a bit of cheat involved here. The scrap that I used had some dry rot
on one side. The crack started at the rot and then continued along the
grain line. I'm sure the rot weakened the wood somewhat, but it still took
a pretty good hit to get it to crack. I probably should have hit it from
the other side.

Looks like the glue did its job.

Tru Dat!