Robert Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 Hi All Anyone advise on the differance between Araldite K106 Epoxy glue and T-88 Epoxy glue I have looked at the specs on both glues but as they are in differant units are hard to compare. I have use both glues and to me T-88 seems to be useable at lower temps. I am interested to hear other opinions Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted December 20, 2009 Share Posted December 20, 2009 Have used T-88 in the past...it's reliable. Never used arildite,except for repairing toys, can't comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yenn Posted December 20, 2009 Share Posted December 20, 2009 I believe T88 has been used for helicopter rotor manufacture. I have used it and found it good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Walter Buschor Posted December 20, 2009 Share Posted December 20, 2009 Hi Robert, Don't know about the T-88 but having been born in Switzerland I do remember that the Venoms and Vampires were repaired with Araldtie. My job in Q-Health is to maintain Surgical gear and Araldite is used to repair Scopes. The one downside of Araldite is the fact that it IS permeable to water !! ie: it is NOT watertight. I cannot comment on the "other stuff" though. I think that there is "better" glu available than the good ol araldite these days safe flying Walter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yenn Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 Is Araldite a type of glue. I thought it was a trade name Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 Araldite. Trade name only, (I think). I used it initially in the 50's to glue in metal engine mounts in speed and teamracer control line models. I know they have produced one specifically for wood as well. I would go with the aero specific ones. that are proven for our purposes. After all it's stuck together for a long time (hopefully). Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deskpilot Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 In all my research on building aircraft, I have never read of Araldite being used. T-88 is generally favoured but that being said, there may be other adhesives out there that are equally as good. I came across some videos on the EAA website that shows the 'prefered' method to glue wooden parts together. You don't say what you intend to glue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methusala Posted April 14, 2010 Share Posted April 14, 2010 Used araldite K-134 I think it was called on the Karatoo wing. Came with data sheets from Luftwaffe saying it was approved for bonding aero aluminium in structural situations. White and expensive. I believe that T-88 is a good substitute but West System resins are well regarded in marine circles. Cheers, Don. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultralights Posted April 14, 2010 Share Posted April 14, 2010 in all my years with Qantas, and now the NAVY and RAAF, Araldite is rarely used, mostly on cabin interior parts like window surrounds and seat parts. araldite K-134 is used extensively in airliner Galley assembly. the Brand HYSOL is everywhere though especially types like HYSOL 9309.3 (bonding adhesive for metal and composite structures), 934, bonding aluminium alloys, 956 high temperature resistance (used in wet layups for engine cowls etc) 1751 for bonding steels titaniums and teflon. and thats just the adhesives, some can be used as resins in fibreglass/carbon fibre and other reinforcing cloths. the RAAF have devised a method of surface preparation that pretty much guarantees the bond will not fail, but the cohesion of the resin itself will fail before the bond to the component. just to do the prep work requires a 5 week training course, and has to be done to very strict temperature an humidity conditions. the short short version is MEK scrub, for 30 mins using a clean scotchbrite every wipe, and change gloves every 5 mins, followed by grit blasting of the surfaces to be bonded using soft aluminium oxide medium, then MEK wipe for another 30 mins using clean cloth every wipe, then GAMMA surface treatment, followed by water wipe, then oven cook at 110DegC to evaporate water for 30 mins. only now can the adhesive be added and the parts bonded. the entire process cant be stopped when started and takes nearly 9 hrs to complete when done by the book. its a long drawn out process, but in some tests the bond has held up and the original metal has failed instead. the key is good surface prep regardless of the resin/adhesive you use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methusala Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 I think that bonding aluminium is problematic because of the hygroscopic nature of the metal. That is that Al has a granular microscopic structure that attracts and retains atmospheric moisture and that this is particularly difficult to shift. It probably follows that other contaminants will also be very difficult to dislodge as well. In wood and fibre matrixes you do not have the same structure and in fact they are absorbant so the glue soaks in to form a very strong bond. The weakness in this form of bonding is when the joint fails between the glue and the structure. Also, the resin when cured does not bond very well to fresh resin. This is why "peel ply" is used when composites are to be joined. Anyway it is very interesting to think about these issues...mostly on the ground first! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 Aluminium "bonding". The Dutch built Fokker F-27's were "redux" bonded.(As well as riveted) at the factory. The "fairchild' (american-built) ones were not. It is obviously not a simple process. The American ones had structural problems as a result. Rivetting and bonding is a good concept as the load(shear) is not concentrated at the rivet. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methusala Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 Nev, Interesting point! I once re-built a Tyro and bonded as well as rivetting the splice plates on the fuselage. Sure made confidence inspiring splices. Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vorticity Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 bOnding alluminim is all about creating a chemically active surface, hence the strict process to ensure quality. FAA won't accept bonded joints alone, you have use a mechanical fastener as well. I'd leave that up to the raaf guys and stick to rivets in the workshop at home. Is there a supply issue with the normal glue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yenn Posted April 18, 2010 Share Posted April 18, 2010 Bonding aluminium homebui;t planes may be more of a disaster than you think. How do you do any repair work, any slight ding will mean a lot of material to replace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JG3 Posted April 19, 2010 Share Posted April 19, 2010 Yep, real good point. I once repaired a much dinged 701 that had used Sikkaflex as well as rivets on some. An extremely strong method of construction. The glue by itself is even stronger than the rivets. Had to destroy the parts to remove them, even after drilling the rivets. With normal rivets and no glue, it was only a matter of unriveting the parts until all was straight and then replacing. JG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now