Sisterlimonpot
Premium Member
Thanks Chomper I will go searching for it.
Can you explain point loading?
This is great.. It's like i'm learning something here
Thanks
Rimless tank adhesive
- Thread starter Sisterlimonpot
- Start date
This is great.. It's like i'm learning something here
ThanksI certainly didn't see you say anything about Stik-N-Seal being 3 times strong the first time that's why i thought you recommend GE, anyways where did you find this conclusion Stik-N-Seal is stronger, i would like to read some results cause to be honest i like name brand and GE is a well known Brand.
CHOMPERS MFK
New member
Stik-N-Seal is made by Loctite (a name brand). This thread is only two pages long so the post you missed should be easy to find. Actually there were two posts with comparisons of the other products as well. I don't have a link for the material spec sheet for the Loctite products but the tensile strength is on the back of each Loctite product package.
CHOMPERS MFK
New member
Point loading is when the force of a load is concentrated to a point (or an approximation there of). A piece of rock on a sheet of glass is an example (bare bottom tank).
There is fear caused by the discussion of point loading mainly from the concept that if a load is concentrated to a point that is infintismally small, that the load becomes infinitely large. However, glass is sufficiently strong to withstand the loading from a tank full of rocks. (Dropping rocks into the bottom of a tank is a different can of worms.)
@ chompers mfk : 900 psi is very impressive when you compare it to general silicone, or even superior grades like dow 999 ! but what of the other measures ? Tear strenght, peel strenght, durometer ? (i am just looking at the 999 factsheet and see those values so they should be comparable)
I can not find the factsheet of loctite stik-n-seal... Somebody has found that ?
are there examples on RC of large glass aquariums made with Stik-N-Seal ?
Another point : when choosing a dow product, should it not be better to use the 995 than the 999 since it has superior values ? durometer 40 in stead of 25 and the tear strenght is also much higher 49 in stead of 25
I can not find the factsheet of loctite stik-n-seal... Somebody has found that ?
are there examples on RC of large glass aquariums made with Stik-N-Seal ?
Another point : when choosing a dow product, should it not be better to use the 995 than the 999 since it has superior values ? durometer 40 in stead of 25 and the tear strenght is also much higher 49 in stead of 25
Giga
New member
Well building a rimless aquarium comes down to three thing:
1) Type of glass used: how thick and tempering
2) Type of silicone: There is a drastic difference in silicone. One is not the same as another. Like said above I use RTV103 and RTV108 because it's has 400psi and reef safe. It more then enough for what I need it for.
http://www.mgchemicals.com/products/103.html
3) how the aquarium is built: there is a few ways to do this and they way I do it provides double the strength then the "normal" ways.
Tempered glass:
I have to agree with this statement as I have never tempered any of the glass in my tanks and have never had a problem.Then again I am no expert, just what I have done.
1) Type of glass used: how thick and tempering
2) Type of silicone: There is a drastic difference in silicone. One is not the same as another. Like said above I use RTV103 and RTV108 because it's has 400psi and reef safe. It more then enough for what I need it for.
http://www.mgchemicals.com/products/103.html
3) how the aquarium is built: there is a few ways to do this and they way I do it provides double the strength then the "normal" ways.
Tempered glass:
I have to agree with this statement as I have never tempered any of the glass in my tanks and have never had a problem.Then again I am no expert, just what I have done.
thriceanangel
New member
Not worth the cost IMHO...
Not worth the cost is an opinion, based on the price only. I am interested in the fysical properties of this adhesive, versus silicone. to be honest, i never heard of a solvent based adhesive that would be good material, to make glass aquarium. That is not proof that it can not be done. I think we should be open for new ideas, but they have to withstand the proof of a real test.
I think that what chompers said, is very true. The cost of a specific silicone or adhesive, is not very important when you take in account the total cost of an aquarium.
I think that what chompers said, is very true. The cost of a specific silicone or adhesive, is not very important when you take in account the total cost of an aquarium.
CHOMPERS MFK
New member
Nope, not really. To call it a 'solvent based adhesive' is pretty much like saying silicone rubber is a solvent based adhesive. It doesn't dissolve the surfaces of what you are trying to glue, so it doesn't chemically weld the materials. It is incredibly sticky when it is in the liquid state, and retains the bond when it cures.
If I recall correctly, it is clear butyl rubber. (Someone dug up the data on it but I didn't save it.) It bonds extremely well to glass and acrylic. I have used it to replace tank panels, build glass sumps, acrylic projects, and to add acrylic baffles in a glass sump. A friend also used it to install an acrylic overflow that I made for him in his glass tank.
concerning Stik 'n Seal, if found some data on a factsheet from Bostik, the Loctite owned factory that produces this. http://bostik.blackweb.co.nz/doc/Stick N seal.pdf
" limitations : this product is not attended as a flexible sealant e.g in place of a construction sealant such as silicone. The high solid content will ensure sealing of up to 5 mm gaps but the movement capabilities are limited to less than 5% "
crap... that sounds like a serious reason not to use it on construction of aquariums... 5% flexibility is an extremely low value.
" limitations : this product is not attended as a flexible sealant e.g in place of a construction sealant such as silicone. The high solid content will ensure sealing of up to 5 mm gaps but the movement capabilities are limited to less than 5% "
crap... that sounds like a serious reason not to use it on construction of aquariums... 5% flexibility is an extremely low value.
exoticaquatix
In Memoriam
what percent flexibility does glass have? is a flexible bond really that necessary?
also, at what point does the strength of the bond exceed the tensile strength of the glass its self? im am all for over building, safety margins and fudge factors but is there a point at which the glass is just as likely to fail as the adhesive?
-nick
also, at what point does the strength of the bond exceed the tensile strength of the glass its self? im am all for over building, safety margins and fudge factors but is there a point at which the glass is just as likely to fail as the adhesive?
-nick
@ exoticaquatix : i do not know, and i have the feeling that few people does. There is little to no information on what factors are important. Adhesion between the two glas panes of course, and for that it seems we have to rely on the tear strenght measured and published by the companies that produces the silicone. But other technical data like durometer, peel strenght, flexibility... They all have an importance, but to what extend ? (for aquarium building that is) It is hard to believe, but it seems that no one has actually tested the properties of different silicones and/or adhesives for aquarium building.
What we need is an engineering student, writing his thesis about this issue. So that the university will back him up and some sponsor can pay for the test environment and material And then of course publish the results here
It is strange that in the aquarium business, we pay hundreds to thousands of euros/dollars for having the best equipment, the best skimmers etc, and then rely on word-of-mouth experience when it concernes the factor that is decisive for holding our aquarium safely together in one piece.
Total absence of empirical data...
What we need is an engineering student, writing his thesis about this issue. So that the university will back him up and some sponsor can pay for the test environment and material
And then of course publish the results here It is strange that in the aquarium business, we pay hundreds to thousands of euros/dollars for having the best equipment, the best skimmers etc, and then rely on word-of-mouth experience when it concernes the factor that is decisive for holding our aquarium safely together in one piece.
Total absence of empirical data...
uncleof6
Active member
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14899425#post14899425 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by X men
@ exoticaquatix : i do not know, and i have the feeling that few people does. There is little to no information on what factors are important. Adhesion between the two glas panes of course, and for that it seems we have to rely on the tear strenght measured and published by the companies that produces the silicone. But other technical data like durometer, peel strenght, flexibility... They all have an importance, but to what extend ? (for aquarium building that is) It is hard to believe, but it seems that no one has actually tested the properties of different silicones and/or adhesives for aquarium building.
What we need is an engineering student, writing his thesis about this issue. So that the university will back him up and some sponsor can pay for the test environment and material
It is strange that in the aquarium business, we pay hundreds to thousands of euros/dollars for having the best equipment, the best skimmers etc, and then rely on word-of-mouth experience when it concernes the factor that is decisive for holding our aquarium safely together in one piece.
Total absence of empirical data...
These data have been tested. But, as usual, it is generally not published (by manufacturers) so you do not build your own tank, but rather buy their tank. And silicone manufacturers, sell "aquarium sealant" in small amounts for pretty much the same line of thinking, however there is a liability issue, if you build a tank and it fails. (blaming the silicone) I did some research in another thread (that went south sorta) Adding that with what is in this thread, the conversation and info I received from Aqueon/AGA, makes more sense. The info I received named Waterford Plant, as manufacturer of the silicone they currently use. Momentive Performance Materials, was associated with Waterford Plant.
Momentive Performance Materials
Waterford Plant
260 Hudson River Rd.
Waterfored, NY 12188
Coming back to "formerly" GE products, having FDA approval, that I mentioned in the other thread. Those being RTV103, and RTV108. (And a couple others.) Aqueon saying they no longer use GE products, so it would be logical to assume they are using "formerly GE products."
Interestingly, the 103 and 108, cross references to Dow Corning 732(FDA approved), rather than 999A (FDA approved) or 795. (795 often recommended also, but not FDA approved). Another tidbit of info: The DAP aquarium sealant, sold at Home Depot, is manufactured by Dow Corning.
This is the only opinion in this post: The factors that are important are the tensile strength, and the FDA approval. Some of the properties you mentioned are not given for all products (looking through the dow corning site)
Jim
