Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Gorilla Glue - limitations

Expand Messages
  • dbaldnz
    There has been a fair bit of euphoria expressed here about Gorilla glue, about how I felt when I first squirted a Gorilla bottle. Epoxy is wonderful stuff, I
    Message 1 of 11 , Jun 4, 2002
      There has been a fair bit of euphoria expressed here about Gorilla
      glue, about how I felt when I first squirted a Gorilla bottle.
      Epoxy is wonderful stuff, I have been using it on boats for 25years,
      and never a failure. But it is expensive, messy, temperature
      sensitive, etc etc, you all know it all.
      Gorilla is easy, one swipe with a damp cloth, a squirt on one side of
      the joint from a convenient gottle, clamp and you are done.
      The Gorilla bottle is covered with garish labels and slogans, at
      least in NZ. Examining them closely is interesting-
      "The ultimate toughest adhesive", then under the
      disclaimers "WARNING, this is not a structural adhesive" (never saw
      an epoxy label claiming epoxy is not structural glue).
      "Incredibly gapfilling", yes, true, but the glue filling the gaps has
      all the strength and consistency of hokey-pokey. So your joints must
      be perfect and well clamped....reduces the speed and convenience
      advantage compared with epoxy.
      Actually the weakness in bulk is a saviour when you study the next
      label- "No drip". Well, you find out the first time you use Gorilla,
      that it drips like spring showers. Luckily it is so weak when cured,
      that a quick flick with a sander turns it to fairy dust. That's the
      same material filling your less than 100% perfect joints.
      I did do some perfect joints, 4 picture frames with corners mitred on
      a bench mitre saw with fine blade. Set them in a jig to hold firmly
      to cure, with an additional panel pin through each joint. Later after
      curing, 3 of the 4 frames fell apart while I hand sanded them! So
      perhaps beware Gorilla on end grain? Glued with epoxy, I could have
      framed the Titanic.
      Chuck Leinweber said the Gorilla glued bow on his Jonboat fell off
      when he clipped a pier on launch day.
      "100% waterproof", well, no glue is 100% waterproof, even epoxy. So
      the jury is out, but I am wary.
      A minor thing, Gorilla cured on humans sets black, and takes 3 days
      to wear off. They say to wipe it off with a cloth, but this is not
      always possible during a tense construction job on a warm day. The
      instructions list no cleaning agents.
      Cost, hard to compare.
      My experiences have been endorsed by several experimenters in other
      Groups.
      I will still keep a bottle of Gorilla glue in my workshop, for use on
      flat machined faces, no cut joints, for interior use, non-structural,
      where mechanical fasteners are permanent. For those applications it
      will be perfect.
      DonB
    • jeff
      ... Exactly how I ve uses it on my Wyoming. Large flat sanded surfaces that can be clamped or screwed down tight. Don t expect this stuff to fill gaps and
      Message 2 of 11 , Jun 4, 2002
        > I will still keep a bottle of Gorilla glue in my workshop, for use on
        > flat machined faces, no cut joints, for interior use, non-structural,
        > where mechanical fasteners are permanent. For those applications it
        > will be perfect.

        Exactly how I've uses it on my Wyoming. Large flat sanded surfaces that can
        be clamped or screwed down tight. Don't expect this stuff to fill gaps and
        have any strength at all! It's just foam that you can dig out with screw
        driver easily. But, where it's clamped tight, it'll hold better than the
        wood. Every where I've used the stuff, I have kept the screws or boat nails
        in place.

        Jeff
      • Nickerson, Bruce
        Seems you are using Gorilla Glue essentially as a wood gasket! ... From: jeff [mailto:boatbuilding@goldencoast.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 10:49 AM To:
        Message 3 of 11 , Jun 4, 2002
          Seems you are using Gorilla Glue essentially as a wood gasket!

          -----Original Message-----
          From: jeff [mailto:boatbuilding@...]
          Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 10:49 AM
          To: bolger@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: Re: [bolger] Gorilla Glue - limitations


          > I will still keep a bottle of Gorilla glue in my workshop, for use on
          > flat machined faces, no cut joints, for interior use, non-structural,
          > where mechanical fasteners are permanent. For those applications it
          > will be perfect.

          Exactly how I've uses it on my Wyoming. Large flat sanded surfaces that can
          be clamped or screwed down tight. Don't expect this stuff to fill gaps and
          have any strength at all! It's just foam that you can dig out with screw
          driver easily. But, where it's clamped tight, it'll hold better than the
          wood. Every where I've used the stuff, I have kept the screws or boat nails
          in place.

          Jeff


          Bolger rules!!!
          - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
          - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no "Ed, thanks, Fred" posts
          - add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
          - To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
          01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
          - Unsubscribe: bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
          <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .




          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • jeff
          Plans call for glue and nails. It ll basically rip the ply layer apart or the cedar will split out. I ve test the joint many ways ( no fasteners), even
          Message 4 of 11 , Jun 4, 2002
            Plans call for glue and nails. It'll basically rip the ply layer apart or
            the cedar will split out. I've test the joint many ways ( no fasteners),
            even slamming it down across the saw horses. Used right it works. It
            could never replace epoxy for the ultimate glue for boats. I limit it to
            inside joints not eposed to weather or water. AND to large flat gluing
            surfaces.

            It simply is faster to use than epoxy. Not better, but good enough to hold
            past the capabilities of the wood. At least on Meranti and Cedar.

            Jeff

            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "Nickerson, Bruce " <nickerb@...>
            To: <bolger@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 8:50 AM
            Subject: RE: [bolger] Gorilla Glue - limitations


            > Seems you are using Gorilla Glue essentially as a wood gasket!
            >
            > -----Original Message-----
            > From: jeff [mailto:boatbuilding@...]
            > Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 10:49 AM
            > To: bolger@yahoogroups.com
            > Subject: Re: [bolger] Gorilla Glue - limitations
            >
            >
            > > I will still keep a bottle of Gorilla glue in my workshop, for use on
            > > flat machined faces, no cut joints, for interior use, non-structural,
            > > where mechanical fasteners are permanent. For those applications it
            > > will be perfect.
            >
            > Exactly how I've uses it on my Wyoming. Large flat sanded surfaces that
            can
            > be clamped or screwed down tight. Don't expect this stuff to fill gaps
            and
            > have any strength at all! It's just foam that you can dig out with screw
            > driver easily. But, where it's clamped tight, it'll hold better than the
            > wood. Every where I've used the stuff, I have kept the screws or boat
            nails
            > in place.
            >
            > Jeff
            >
            >
            > Bolger rules!!!
            > - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
            > - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no "Ed, thanks, Fred" posts
            > - add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
            > - To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
            > 01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
            > - Unsubscribe: bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >
            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
            > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
            >
            >
            > Bolger rules!!!
            > - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
            > - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no "Ed, thanks, Fred" posts
            > - add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
            > - To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
            01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
            > - Unsubscribe: bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >
            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            >
            >
          • brucehallman
            ... The GG website says that 95% of the joint failures are caused by lack of moisture. They recommend 10% to 25% moisture content. 25% moisture in wood is
            Message 5 of 11 , Jun 4, 2002
              --- In bolger@y..., "dbaldnz" <oink@p...> wrote:
              > 3 of the 4 frames fell
              > apart while I hand sanded them!

              The GG website says that 95% of the
              joint failures are caused by lack of
              moisture. They recommend 10% to 25%
              moisture content. 25% moisture in wood
              is "squirt you in the eye" wet.

              Perhaps the density of the hardwood
              in the picture frames prevented the
              moisture from soaking into the wood?

              > My experiences have been endorsed by
              > several experimenters in other Groups.

              I just 'experimented' by breaking an 8:1 scarf joint in 1/8" luaun
              plywood. The failure was in the wood immediately next to the glue
              joint. The glue did not fail.

              See photo at:
              http://www.hallman.org/bolger/scarf.jpg

              I agree that epoxy is better. But what good is better, if it is
              beyond 'good enough'?

              With the big warning 'lots of water needed in the joint'; based on my
              experiment, I conclude that Gorilla Glue is stronger than wood and
              that Gorilla glue is good enough for most normal situations. It also
              is easier to use.
            • dbaldnz
              Hi Bruce, Actually, I had not seen the web site when I made the picture frames. The frames were actually softwood (clear grade pinus radiata), and I really
              Message 6 of 11 , Jun 4, 2002
                Hi Bruce,
                Actually, I had not seen the web site when I made the picture frames.
                The frames were actually softwood (clear grade pinus radiata), and I
                really well wet them with a fully saturated sponge - in fact I
                thought after the failure that I must have over-wetted it. Don't see
                how I didn't comply with the instructions in any way. The joinig
                faces were perfect and tightly held. I suspect the glue is not very
                satisfactory for end grain, unless in larger area like your scarphs.
                The thing is, epoxy is very forgiving, you would have to grossly
                ignore the instructions to have a total joint failure of this type.
                Your boat has yet to be tested, and I wish you success, but once the
                trust is gone, as in my case and several others, I will be very wary
                of Gorilla except under limited conditions. I did want it to work for
                it's other advantages you mention.
                DonB

                --- In bolger@y..., "brucehallman" <brucehallman@y...> wrote:
                > --- In bolger@y..., "dbaldnz" <oink@p...> wrote:
                > > 3 of the 4 frames fell
                > > apart while I hand sanded them!
                >
                > The GG website says that 95% of the
                > joint failures are caused by lack of
                > moisture. They recommend 10% to 25%
                > moisture content. 25% moisture in wood
                > is "squirt you in the eye" wet.
                >
                > Perhaps the density of the hardwood
                > in the picture frames prevented the
                > moisture from soaking into the wood?
                >
                > > My experiences have been endorsed by
                > > several experimenters in other Groups.
                >
                > I just 'experimented' by breaking an 8:1 scarf joint in 1/8" luaun
                > plywood. The failure was in the wood immediately next to the glue
                > joint. The glue did not fail.
                >
                > See photo at:
                > http://www.hallman.org/bolger/scarf.jpg
                >
                > I agree that epoxy is better. But what good is better, if it is
                > beyond 'good enough'?
                >
                > With the big warning 'lots of water needed in the joint'; based on
                my
                > experiment, I conclude that Gorilla Glue is stronger than wood and
                > that Gorilla glue is good enough for most normal situations. It
                also
                > is easier to use.
              • jeff
                ... My experience exactly. I ve used about a gallon of the stuff already on the Wyoming. I have a spray bottle of water and mist both pieces to be glued.
                Message 7 of 11 , Jun 5, 2002
                  > With the big warning 'lots of water needed in the joint'; based on my
                  > experiment, I conclude that Gorilla Glue is stronger than wood and
                  > that Gorilla glue is good enough for most normal situations. It also
                  > is easier to use.

                  My experience exactly. I've used about a gallon of the stuff already on the
                  Wyoming. I have a spray bottle of water and mist both pieces to be glued.
                  What I see happening is that the wood then does not wick the glue into the
                  grain as much leaving more in the joint and of course the PL glues are
                  activated by moisture. Very much the same as priming an epoxy joint before
                  gluing with thickened epoxy to keep form getting a dry joint.

                  As for high stress and shock loads on some joints like the stem, chines, and
                  rub rails, I use epoxy. No sense in pushing the limits of a glue for
                  convenience.

                  Again, my experience is strictly with Meranti plywood and cedar.

                  Jeff
                • Chuck Leinweber
                  I just experimented by breaking an 8:1 scarf joint in 1/8 luaun plywood. The failure was in the wood immediately next to the glue joint. The glue did not
                  Message 8 of 11 , Jun 5, 2002
                    I just 'experimented' by breaking an 8:1 scarf joint in 1/8" luaun
                    plywood. The failure was in the wood immediately next to the glue
                    joint. The glue did not fail.

                    See photo at:
                    http://www.hallman.org/bolger/scarf.jpg

                    Am I missing something? This looks like joint failure to me. The separation was at the glue/wood interface (unless I am looking at the wrong picture) not in the wood. If it were a good joint, the break would not follow the joint, but would travel across the ply in some other direction. That said, it might still be good enough for some applications.

                    Chuck


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • proaconstrictor
                    ... Agreed, but destructive failure is only one kind. And it is other kinds of failure like those related to creep where epoxy shines. Boat hulls are not all
                    Message 9 of 11 , Jun 5, 2002
                      > I just 'experimented' by breaking an 8:1 scarf joint in 1/8" luaun
                      > plywood. The failure was in the wood immediately next to the glue
                      > joint. The glue did not fail.
                      >
                      > See photo at:
                      > http://www.hallman.org/bolger/scarf.jpg
                      >
                      > I agree that epoxy is better. But what good is better, if it is
                      > beyond 'good enough'?

                      Agreed, but destructive failure is only one kind. And it is other
                      kinds of failure like those related to creep where epoxy shines.
                      Boat hulls are not all that heavily stressed just from normal
                      floating around. And I don't think most of us are planing super
                      heavy use, but if you are really putting these materials to long term
                      test, you need machines that do many cycles to failure.

                      I am perplexed by the photo. You must be murder on phone books. I
                      don't think I could just rip a piece of 1/8" plywood accross the
                      grain like that. Must save enourmously on sawblades. It seems to
                      ripped right down the middle of the joint. Even if you pulled a few
                      fibers away from either side, I can't see why it should have torn
                      apart where it did
                    • brucehallman
                      ... In the picture the scarf joint is not as obvious as the linear smear of excess glue that overflowed from the joint, with the smear made flat by my use of
                      Message 10 of 11 , Jun 5, 2002
                        --- In bolger@y..., "Chuck Leinweber" <chuck_dm@y...> wrote:
                        > Am I missing something? This looks like joint failure to me.

                        In the picture the scarf joint is not as obvious as the
                        linear "smear" of excess glue that overflowed from the joint, with
                        the smear made flat by my use of a strip of packaging tape run along
                        the joint over the wet glue. This was to prevent the plywood from
                        adhering to the clamping board and/or my work bench.

                        The picture may not be clear, but I inspected it real close and the
                        plane of failure was right at the edge of the glued joint, and the
                        point of weakness seems to be a failure of the very thin outer
                        laminate in the cheapo luaun plywood I was using. The plane of
                        failure was perpendicular to the surface of the plywood, not at a 1:8
                        angle which you would expect if the glue was to fail.

                        It appears somehow that the section at the glued scarf joint is
                        stiffer in deflection than 'plain' plywood, causing a concentration
                        of stress right next to the joint. Perhaps the glue in the scarf
                        joint penetrates into the nearby wood fibers 'locking' fibers
                        together making things stiff in that immediate area, where nearby
                        wood is full of air and weaker.
                      • Chuck Leinweber
                        My apologies, Bruce. I definitely misinterpreted the picture. I thought that the failure was along the scarf, rather than through the ply. Chuck The picture
                        Message 11 of 11 , Jun 6, 2002
                          My apologies, Bruce. I definitely misinterpreted the picture. I thought that the failure was along the scarf, rather than through the ply.

                          Chuck
                          The picture may not be clear, but I inspected it real close and the
                          plane of failure was right at the edge of the glued joint, and the
                          point of weakness seems to be a failure of the very thin outer
                          laminate in the cheapo luaun plywood I was using. The plane of
                          failure was perpendicular to the surface of the plywood, not at a 1:8
                          angle which you would expect if the glue was to fail. - Bruce


                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.