| Official Luthiers Forum! http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/ |
|
| Anyone use CA for braces? http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=1883 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Jimson [ Wed May 04, 2005 3:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Help - I am falling into analysis paralysis (again). I just tested adhesion - spruce to Indian rosewood - and the results are very positive. My experience with CA comes from years of R/C modeling, so I know the joint will last almost forever. At this point, I'm wondering whether there are reasons NOT to use CA? A repair issue possibly? Benefits: strong joints, thin CA stiffens the brace and it's fast. Negatives: the fumes must be avoided, thin glue can stain your top and it's fast. Voice of experience? Anybody? TFL |
|
| Author: | Brock Poling [ Thu May 05, 2005 12:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I don't know so much from experience.... never tried it, but if you want to keep your work neat I think you are asking for trouble. And.... how would you get clamps on it fast enough? I can't see you getting your x brace clamped before the glue was dry. |
|
| Author: | LanceK [ Thu May 05, 2005 1:04 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Jim - Kevin Gallagher (Omega Guitars) Once built a guitar using ONLY CA- He had a client that HAD TO HAVE a guitar in less than a week, Kevin kicked it out. He said that the guy is using it to this day with no problems. If I were going to use it for braces - I would use the gel type, and use it sparingly to prevent much squeeze out. |
|
| Author: | Mattia Valente [ Thu May 05, 2005 1:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
The only think I'd worry about a little bit is CA's low impact resistance. Deb (over at the MIMF) reported she built a couple of hammered dulcimers with the stuff, and that they fell apart eventually. So there's that to think about. OTOH, a very large portion of bridges on cheap imported guitars seemed to be glued straight to the finish using CA glue, and they don't come flying off every day, so CA technology might've come a ways and whatnot. I'll stick to titebond and (when I get to grips with it) hot hide glue for construction, and keep the CA for bindings and inlay, I think. |
|
| Author: | Pwoolson [ Thu May 05, 2005 2:28 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm not sure what you would be gaining with CA on braces. Titebond sets to leather in 12 minutes in my shop. I can move and glue something else after that time. Got the tops down to a science and can have one completely braced up in 30 minutes. After the final brace is done, I'll let it sit for 2 hours before carving. I'm not sure I'd be comfortable building a guitar in a week but I'm pretty sure I could do it just as fast with titebond as I could with CA. As said before, you'll have LOTS of mess with CA and no real way to clean it up until after you take clamps off and then you're chisling and scraping. YUCK! Another thought: I've had bad luck gluing two pieces of wood together with thin CA. Especially soft woods like spruce. It wants to wick into the wood and not make a bond. I'm sure thick CA is better but I'd still be a bit leary. Also, it's so brittle, you would have very little give in the event of an impact. I would think if the guitar got dropped you would run a risk of the whole thing shattering to pieces. |
|
| Author: | bob J [ Thu May 05, 2005 6:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Why CA for bindings and inlay? Is it better than LMI luthier's glue? |
|
| Author: | Mattia Valente [ Thu May 05, 2005 6:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm going to try titebond for bindings, because the CA was a bit messy, but CA works well for me for fingerboard bindings, and makes inlay very, very easy. LMI's glue and titebond would be pretty much entirely useless for gluing in inlay, I would think. |
|
| Author: | Michael Dale Payne [ Thu May 05, 2005 8:41 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I only use CA (thin) on shell pufling and inlay. Mainly because it so well. For bindings though I use Titebond on wood bindings and Duco on plastic. But I don't do many plastic bindings if I can help it  I just like wood bindings
I would not use CA on braces due to near instant bond and mess. I like to be able to apply the glue and confirm location as I clamp in the go-bar deck. |
|
| Author: | Mike Mahar [ Thu May 05, 2005 8:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
The advantage of CA for bindings and purflings is that you can set them into the channels, tape them down tightly and THEN wick in the glue. If you use clear packing tape you can check for any gaps before you start gluing. I was gluing some bindings into a guitar recently and then realized that they were just a bit too long. This causes a gap that I could close in one spot and then it would open up in another. I had to remove most of the tape, trim the ends a bit, and re-tape. If I have put the glue in in advance with titebond I would have be in trouble. |
|
| Author: | Jimson [ Thu May 05, 2005 4:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Thanks for the input folks. I think one of the main reasons I keep thinking about CA is that I am used to using it. With Titebond I don't do what I consider a good job of cleanup. When I wait for the 'leather dry' stage I wind up using water to clean up the squeeze out. Another attraction is the idea of shaping all the braces before gluing to the plates. I got some ...inexpensive sound boards last week (from Acoustic woods - ordered five received six - good wood but most has cosmetic problems) so I'm thinking I will do a test soundbox - see how it goes. |
|
| Author: | Brock Poling [ Fri May 06, 2005 12:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Titebond is pretty easy to clean up. Most people say to wait 15 minutes before you scrape it up, I only wait like 7 or so. I find it is still a little softer and comes up cleaner with less work. Between my glue chisel (which I leave pretty dull), a couple of small scrapers and occassionally a razor blade I can get all of the glue up without using water. |
|
| Author: | Pwoolson [ Fri May 06, 2005 12:18 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I agree with Brock, There really shouldn't be much need to introduce water into the equation. I use a razor blade and my glue chisel to get into the tight places. I've hit it from all stages, very wet to totally dry and never really had much problem getting it out. |
|
| Author: | Steve Kinnaird [ Fri May 06, 2005 4:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Paul spoke of CA having a low impact resistance. My experience was a bit different. Last year I made a couple of try squares: Cocobolo handles w/ thick brass blades. The construction sequence called for the blades first to be superglued into the handles (before pins were inserted). Of course, I got one of the blades set at 92 degrees, not 90. "I'll just knock it out, and reset it" was my strategy. So I clamped the handle in a vise, and began whamming at the blade w/ a hammer. It would not budge. I had to get the propane torch out, heat the blade, and then it just slid out. Thoughts-- the oils in the cocobolo aided chemically in the bond; there was no softwood grain for the glue to wick into, only hard brass; and once a good bond is created, CA is amazingly strong. Also, cocobolo makes a beautiful try square. I wouldn't fear using CA for braces if the other points could be resolved to one's satisfaction. Steve |
|
| Author: | Jimson [ Fri May 06, 2005 11:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
As I say I have lots of experience, mostly positive with CA. As far as impact resistance, my gliders are usually built-up with spruce, plywood and carbon-reinforced balsa and never experienced a failure at the glue joint! Between 'mid-air crashes' and heavy-footed winch launches this is really saying something. So -I do wonder what would happen if the glue joint will NOT move while the rest of the soundbox is shrinking or swelling due to heat or humidity/aridness. Back to Titebond - all I have is "book learning" and some things I have come to accept as gospel. Such as waiting for the leather-hard stage before chiseling the squeeze-out. I'm pleased to hear that this isn't a hard and fast rule. Thanks Folks -  nice place you got here!
|
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|