CA cement: Is it REALLY fuel-proof...........................

SuperDave Thu Oct 13, 2011 9:11 am

and how do you know?

Thanks for you responses.

nitroairplane Thu Oct 13, 2011 10:52 am

Well i sue it and i run 25% nitro and never had a model fall apart.

SuperDave Thu Oct 13, 2011 11:11 am

nitroairplane wrote:Well i sue it and i run 25% nitro and never had a model fall apart.

How about softening so as to weaken or distort the airframe?

nitroairplane Thu Oct 13, 2011 11:21 am

SuperDave wrote:
nitroairplane wrote:Well i sue it and i run 25% nitro and never had a model fall apart.

How about softening so as to weaken or distort the airframe?

Well when exposed to actual fuel for a long period of time it f=goes white and semi sticky (like whet hard candy)
But it is fine with fuel vapours and castor oil.
what thickness would you use?

nitroairplane Thu Oct 13, 2011 11:21 am

nitroairplane wrote:
SuperDave wrote:
nitroairplane wrote:Well i sue it and i run 25% nitro and never had a model fall apart.

How about softening so as to weaken or distort the airframe?

Well when exposed to actual fuel for a long period of time it goes white and semi sticky (like whet hard candy)
But it is fine with fuel vapours and castor oil.
what thickness would you use?

SuperDave Thu Oct 13, 2011 12:56 pm

Most often CA+ medium.

I have one of my old stunters built with Ambroid in 1962 and it may still be safety flown to this day although it would require re-covering to do so. The papering has badly deteriorated but the airframe is still solid..

If I ever get so motivated I would strip it away and replace it with modern synthetic covering.

BTW, it's a Kenhi "Cougar" with Veco .35 power and never crashed

nitroairplane Thu Oct 13, 2011 12:57 pm

SuperDave wrote:Most often CA+ medium.

I have one of my old stunters built with Ambroid in 1962 and it may still be safety flown to this day although it would require re-covering to do so. The papering has badly deteriorated but the airframe is still solid..

If I ever get so motivated I would strip it away and replace it with modern synthetic covering.

BTW, it's a Kenhi "Cougar" with Veco .35 power and never crashed

You should be good what do you usually use?

tubebass Thu Oct 13, 2011 3:25 pm

It's my understanding that nitromethane is the active ingredient in CA debonder. That said, I've never seen or heard of glue joints failing due to fuel soakage in actual use.

andrew Thu Oct 13, 2011 3:53 pm

Nitromethane is listed as the primary base in many CA solvent/debonders and is capable of dissolving cured CA.

See the following link: http://www.ca-plus.com/ca_acc_dec.html

MSDS Sheet for another commercial debonder: http://www.tedpella.com/msds_html/19920msds.htm

Third commercial debonder (at bottom of page): http://www.resinlab.com/adhesive/cyanoacrylate.html

The question becomes whether it is effective in the concentrations we use. However, prolonged or continuous exposure to > 25% nitro fuels may have a tendency to weaken joints over time.

nitroairplane Thu Oct 13, 2011 4:45 pm

andrew wrote:Nitromethane is listed as the primary base in many CA solvent/debonders and is capable of dissolving cured CA.

See the following link: http://www.ca-plus.com/ca_acc_dec.html

MSDS Sheet for another commercial debonder: http://www.tedpella.com/msds_html/19920msds.htm

Third commercial debonder (at bottom of page): http://www.resinlab.com/adhesive/cyanoacrylate.html

The question becomes whether it is effective in the concentrations we use. However, prolonged or continuous exposure to > 25% nitro fuels may have a tendency to weaken joints over time.

It's good for me and I run 20-35% nitro.
But just keep a rag handy to wipe it as soon as you land it.

gcb Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:11 pm

In most applications there is some kind of finish or covering between the CA and the high nitro fuel.

Are you planning an application where CA will be diretly exposed to fuel? If so, I would strongly suggest you switch to another adhesive, such as epoxy, for that application.

Although there are other debonders, mine is nitromethane. Fuel has never penetrated my planes and caused debonding...so far.

George

andrew Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:31 pm

gcb wrote:
Are you planning an application where CA will be diretly exposed to fuel? If so, I would strongly suggest you switch to another adhesive, such as epoxy, for that application.

Although there are other debonders, mine is nitromethane. Fuel has never penetrated my planes and caused debonding...so far.
George

Nitromethane is quite volatile (in an evaporative sense), so spilled fuel is probably going to be the biggest culprit. A quick wipe should help keep most of the solvent off. The residue after flying is oil -- which can contribute its own damage.

I like to use epoxy where ever there is likely to be direct contact with either fuel or oil residue and always apply a thin coating of epoxy to the firewall and surrounding joints.

However, I've found dirt to be the quickest and most effective debonder; I've had several planes debond completely when they hit the ground. Sad

gcb Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:43 pm

andrew wrote:...However, I've found dirt to be the quickest and most effective debonder; I've had several planes debond completely when they hit the ground.

AMEN!

George

PV Pilot Fri Oct 14, 2011 1:07 pm

I think just about all nitro kit plans reccommend a CA during assembly, so it stand to reason that it is fuel proof, to an extent. Sig and all the rest are hanging it out on the line to reccommend that type of glue/cement. Of course they also reccommend a dope fuel proof or iron-on to make the model last, but I am sure that they are certain that the CA that is used during assembly will encounter nitro fuel at one point in time.

High percentage nitro will soften and dissolve it over time.

CA mediums here also.

Regular gasoline is a excellent CA debonder.

SuperDave Fri Oct 14, 2011 1:46 pm

Wherever direct exposure to nitro is a concern I prefer to use "Sig-ment" rather than CA adhesive. "Sig-ment" sells for a little less than $7/ 4 oz. tube. Four ounces goes a long way and is much easier to remove from hands/clothes than CA.

nitroairplane Fri Oct 14, 2011 3:17 pm

SuperDave wrote:Wherever direct exposure to nitro is a concern I prefer to use "Sig-ment" rather than CA adhesive. "Sig-ment" sells for a little less than $7/ 4 oz. tube. Four ounces goes a long way and is much easier to remove from hands/clothes than CA.

I like CA because it is so quick for those little misshaps at the field you can be up and flying again in less than 5mins.

Sponsored content

CA cement: Is it REALLY fuel-proof...........................

CA cement: Is it REALLY fuel-proof...........................

Re: CA cement: Is it REALLY fuel-proof...........................

Re: CA cement: Is it REALLY fuel-proof...........................

Re: CA cement: Is it REALLY fuel-proof...........................

Re: CA cement: Is it REALLY fuel-proof...........................

Re: CA cement: Is it REALLY fuel-proof...........................

Re: CA cement: Is it REALLY fuel-proof...........................

Re: CA cement: Is it REALLY fuel-proof...........................

Re: CA cement: Is it REALLY fuel-proof...........................

Re: CA cement: Is it REALLY fuel-proof...........................

Re: CA cement: Is it REALLY fuel-proof...........................

Re: CA cement: Is it REALLY fuel-proof...........................

Re: CA cement: Is it REALLY fuel-proof...........................

Re: CA cement: Is it REALLY fuel-proof...........................

Re: CA cement: Is it REALLY fuel-proof...........................

Re: CA cement: Is it REALLY fuel-proof...........................

Re: CA cement: Is it REALLY fuel-proof...........................