ARL-TR-8014 ● MAY 2017

US Army Research Laboratory

Initial Screening of Environmentally 

Sustainable Surface Pretreatments for 

Adhesive Bonding Applications

by Miriam S Silton, David P Flanagan, Daniel C DeSchepper, 

and Robert E Jensen

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
NOTICES

Disclaimers

The findings in this report are not to be construed as an official Department of the 

Army position unless so designated by other authorized documents.

Citation of manufacturer’s or trade names does not constitute an official 

endorsement or approval of the use thereof.

Destroy this report when it is no longer needed. Do not return it to the originator.
ARL-TR-8014 ● MAY 2017

US Army Research Laboratory

Initial Screening of Environmentally 

Sustainable Surface Pretreatments for 

Adhesive Bonding Applications

by Miriam S Silton

The Academy of Applied Science via the Qualified Leaders Program, 

Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD

David P Flanagan, Daniel C DeSchepper, and Robert E Jensen

Weapons and Materials Research Directorate (ARL)

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
ii

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved

OMB No. 0704-0188

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the 

data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the 

burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. 

Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently 

valid OMB control number.

PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS.

1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)

May 2017

2. REPORT TYPE

Technical Report

3. DATES COVERED (From - To)

June 2015–January 2017

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Initial Screening of Environmentally Sustainable Surface Pretreatments for 

Adhesive Bonding Applications

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

W911SR-15-2-0001

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S)

Miriam S Silton, David P Flanagan, Daniel C DeSchepper, and 

Robert E Jensen

5d. PROJECT NUMBER

R.0010455.2.92

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

US Army Research Laboratory

ATTN: RDRL-WMM-C

Aberdeen Proving Ground MD 21005-5069

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER

ARL-TR-8014

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S)

11. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT NUMBER(S)

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

14. ABSTRACT

A methacrylate adhesive marketed for high-temperature applications was screened in combination with environmentally 

sustainable TT-C-490F surface pretreatments. Testing consisted of single-lap-joint testing using aluminum and steel 

specimens at room temperature along with hot/wet (H/W) conditioning (water immersion for 14 d at 63 °C) and in-situ at 

elevated temperature (ET) (71 °C). The methacrylate adhesive showed high initial bond strength and H/W durability but 

significant loss of strength retention at ET. The environmentally sustainable TT-C-490F Type IV inorganic pretreatments 

resulted in little to no loss of adhesive bond strength during H/W conditioning and their potential use as bonding pretreatments 

is worth further investigation.

15. SUBJECT TERMS

methacrylate adhesive, single-lap-joint, TT-C-490F, wash primer, pretreatment

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF:

17. LIMITATION

 OF

 ABSTRACT

UU

18. NUMBER

 OF 

 PAGES

76

19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

Robert E Jensen

a. REPORT

Unclassified

b. ABSTRACT

Unclassified

c. THIS PAGE

Unclassified

19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code)

410-306-1910

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8/98)

Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39.18
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

iii

Contents

List of Figures v

List of Tables xi

Acknowledgments xii

1. Introduction 1

2. Experimental 2

2.1 Materials and Environmental Assessment 2

2.2 Joint Geometry 3

2.2.1 Surface Preparation 4

2.2.2 Bonding 5

2.3 Testing 6

2.3.1 Mechanical Testing 6

2.3.2 Dynamic Mechanical Analysis 7

3. Results 8

4. Discussion 11

5. Conclusions 17

6. References 18

Appendix A. Environmental Restrictions Listed against the Adhesive and 

Surface Pretreatments 21

Appendix B. Load versus Displacement Curves and Failure Surface 

Scans 25

Appendix C. Supporting Digital File Archive Index 57
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

iv

List of Symbols, Abbreviations, and Acronyms 59

Distribution List 61
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

v

List of Figures

Fig. 1 Notional life-cycle costs for a DOD weapon system............................ 1

Fig. 2 Illustration of the adhesively bonded single-lap-joint test specimen 

configuration (refer to ASTM D1002-10 for dimensions) ................... 3

Fig. 3 Single-lap-joint coupons undergoing dip-coat pretreatment................. 4

Fig. 4 Single-lap-joint bonding tooling fixture components........................... 5

Fig. 5 Stacking assembly for fabrication of single-lap-joint panel ................. 6

Fig. 6 Average maximum strength at failure (MPa) for aluminum 2024 T3, 

RT, H/W, and ET conditioning............................................................. 9

Fig. 7 Average maximum displacement at failure (mm) for aluminum 

2024 T3, RT, H/W, and ET conditioning ........................................... 10

Fig. 8 Average maximum strength at failure (MPa) for 1010 mild steel, RT, 

and H/W conditioning. ET conditioning not tested for steel 

samples................................................................................................ 10

Fig. 9 Average maximum displacement at failure (mm) for 1010 mild steel, 

RT, and H/W conditioning. ET conditioning not tested for steel 

samples................................................................................................ 11

Fig. 10 Load vs. displacement response for aluminum single-lap-joints 

pretreated by grit blasting and with ZIRCOBOND TT-C-490F Type 

IV surface pretreatment....................................................................... 12

Fig. 11 Failure surfaces for aluminum single-lap-joint with grit-blasted surface 

(left) and ZIRCOBOND 4200 (right) pretreatments .......................... 12

Fig. 12 Load vs. displacement response for aluminum single-lap-joints 

pretreated with APS, steel samples pretreated with AC-131, and steel 

and aluminum pretreated with ZIRCOBOND TT-C-490F Type IV 

surface pretreatment............................................................................ 13

Fig. 13 Failure surfaces for aluminum single-lap-joint pretreated with APS 

(left) and steel pretreated with AC-131 (right) ................................... 14

Fig. 14 Load vs. displacement response for grit-blasted aluminum single-lapjoints tested at RT and 71 °C .............................................................. 16

Fig. 15 Failure surfaces for grit-blasted aluminum single-lap-joints tested at 

RT (left) and 71°C (right)................................................................... 16

Fig. 16 Storage modulus (E’) and loss modulus (E’’) vs. temperature for 

SG805 ................................................................................................. 17
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

vi

Fig. B-1 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with aluminum 

oxide grit blast surface pretreatment. Materials Selection and Analysis 

Tool (MSAT) identifications (IDs) = 20150215–20150219, substrate

= 2024 T3 aluminum, sample conditioning = RT.............................. 26

Fig. B-2 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with aluminum oxide grit blast 

surface pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150215, substrate = 2024 T3 

aluminum, and sample conditioning = RT. Mode-of-failure = mixedmode (MM)......................................................................................... 26

Fig. B-3 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with 3-

aminopropyltrimethoxysilane surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 

20150225–20150229, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample 

conditioning = RT............................................................................... 27

Fig. B-4 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with 3-

aminopropyltrimethoxysilane surface pretreatment. MSAT ID = 

20150225, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning 

= RT. Mode-of-failure = adhesive. ..................................................... 27

Fig. B-5 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with AC-131 

BB surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150235–20150239, substrate 

= 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning = RT........................ 28

Fig. B-6 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with AC-131 BB surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150235, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, 

and sample conditioning = RT. Mode-of-failure = MM..................... 28

Fig. B-7 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with SurTec 

650 surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150245–20150249, 

substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning = RT......... 29

Fig. B-8 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with SurTec 650 surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150245, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, 

and sample conditioning = RT. Mode-of-failure = MM..................... 29

Fig. B-9 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with Bonderite 

M-NT 5700 surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150255–20150259, 

substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning = RT......... 30

Fig. B-10 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with Bonderite M-NT 5700 

surface pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150255, substrate = 2024 T3 

aluminum, and sample conditioning = RT. Mode-of-failure = 

adhesive/ MM. .................................................................................... 30

Fig. B-11 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with Bonderite 

M-NT 7400 surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150265–20150269, 

substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning = RT......... 31

Fig. B-12 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with Bonderite M-NT 7400 

surface pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150265, substrate = 2024 T3 

aluminum, and sample conditioning = RT. Mode-of-failure = 

adhesive/ MM. .................................................................................... 31
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

vii

Fig. B-13 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with XBOND 

4000DM-DR surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150275–

20150279, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning 

= RT. ................................................................................................... 32

Fig. B-14 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with XBOND 4000DM-DR 

surface pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150275, substrate = 2024 T3 

aluminum, and sample conditioning = RT. Mode-of-failure = 

adhesive/ MM. .................................................................................... 32

Fig. B-15 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with 

ZIRCOBOND 4200 surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150285–

20150289, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning 

= RT. ................................................................................................... 33

Fig. B-16 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with ZIRCOBOND 4200 surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150285, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, 

and sample conditioning = RT. Mode-of-failure = MM..................... 33

Fig. B-17 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with aluminum 

oxide grit blast surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150220–

20150224, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning = 

H/W..................................................................................................... 34

Fig. B-18 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with aluminum oxide grit blast 

surface pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150222, substrate = 2024 T3 

aluminum, and sample conditioning = H/W. Mode-of-failure = MM.34

Fig. B-19 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with 3-

aminopropyltrimethoxysilane surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 

20150230–20150234, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample 

conditioning = H/W. ........................................................................... 35

Fig. B-20 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with 3-

aminopropyltrimethoxysilane surface pretreatment. MSAT ID = 

20150230, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning = 

H/W. Mode-of-failure = adhesive....................................................... 35

Fig. B-21 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with AC-131 

BB surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150240–20150244, substrate 

= 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning = H/W. .................... 36

Fig. B-22 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with AC-131 BB surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150240, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, 

and sample conditioning = H/W. Mode-of-failure = MM. ................. 36

Fig. B-23 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with SurTec 

650 surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150250–20150254, 

substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning = H/W. ..... 37

Fig. B-24 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with SurTec 650 surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150250, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, 

and sample conditioning = H/W. Mode-of-failure = MM. ................. 37
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

viii

Fig. B-25 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with Bonderite 

M-NT 5700 surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150260–20150264, 

substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning = H/W. ..... 38

Fig. B-26 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with Bonderite M-NT 5700 

surface pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150260, substrate = 2024 T3 

aluminum, and sample conditioning = H/W. Mode-of-failure = 

adhesive/ MM. .................................................................................... 38

Fig. B-27 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with Bonderite 

M-NT 7400 surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150270–20150274, 

substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning = H/W. ..... 39

Fig. B-28 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with Bonderite M-NT 7400 

surface pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150270, substrate = 2024 T3 

aluminum, and sample conditioning = H/W. Mode-of-failure = 

adhesive/ MM. .................................................................................... 39

Fig. B-29 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with XBOND 

4000DM-DR surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150280–

20150284, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning = 

H/W..................................................................................................... 40

Fig. B-30 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with XBOND 4000DM-DR 

surface pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150280, substrate = 2024 T3 

aluminum, and sample conditioning = H/W. Mode-of-failure = 

adhesive/ MM. .................................................................................... 40

Fig. B-31 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with 

ZIRCOBOND 4200 surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150290–

20150294, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning 

= H/W. ................................................................................................ 41

Fig. B-32 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with ZIRCOBOND 4200 surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150290, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, 

and sample conditioning = H/W. Mode-of-failure = MM. ................. 41

Fig. B-33 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with aluminum 

oxide grit blast surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150871–

20150875, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and test conditions = ET. 42

Fig. B-34 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with aluminum oxide grit blast 

surface pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150871, substrate = 2024 T3 

aluminum, and test conditions = ET. Mode-of-failure = MM. ........... 42

Fig. B-35 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with 3-

aminopropyltrimethoxysilane surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 

20150388–20150392, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and test 

conditions = ET................................................................................... 43

Fig. B-36 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with 3-

aminopropyltrimethoxysilane pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150388, 

substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and test conditions = ET Mode-offailure = adhesive................................................................................ 43
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

ix

Fig. B-37 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with AC-131 

BB surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150438–20150442, substrate 

= 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = RT. ..................................... 44

Fig. B-38 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with AC-131 BB surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150438, substrate = 1010 steel, sample 

conditioning = RT. Mode-of-failure = MM........................................ 44

Fig. B-39 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with SurTec 

650 surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150448–20150452, 

substrate = 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = RT....................... 45

Fig. B-40 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with SurTec 650 surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150448, substrate = 1010 steel, and 

sample conditioning = RT. Mode-of-failure = MM. .......................... 45

Fig. B-41 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with Bonderite 

M-NT 5700 surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150458–20150462, 

substrate = 1010 steel, sample conditioning = RT.............................. 46

Fig. B-42 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with Bonderite M-NT 5700 

surface pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150461, substrate = 1010 steel, 

and sample conditioning = RT. Mode-of-failure = MM..................... 46

Fig. B-43 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with Bonderite 

M-NT 7400 surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150468–20150472, 

substrate = 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = RT....................... 47

Fig. B-44 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with Bonderite M-NT 7400 

surface pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150468, substrate = 1010 steel, 

and sample conditioning = RT. Mode-of-failure = MM..................... 47

Fig. B-45 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with XBOND 

4000DM-DR surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150478–

20150482, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = RT. .... 48

Fig. B-46 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with XBOND 4000DM-DR 

surface pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150478, substrate = 1010 steel, 

and sample conditioning = RT. Mode-of-failure = MM..................... 48

Fig. B-47 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with 

ZIRCOBOND 4200 surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150488–

20150492, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = RT. .... 49

Fig. B-48 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with ZIRCOBOND 4200 surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150492, substrate = 1010 steel, and 

sample conditioning = RT. Mode-of-failure = MM. .......................... 49

Fig. B-49 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with AC-131 

BB surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150443–20150447, substrate 

= 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = H/W.................................... 50

Fig. B-50 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with AC-131 BB surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150443, substrate = 1010 steel, and 

sample conditioning = H/W. Mode-of-failure = MM......................... 50
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

x

Fig. B-51 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with SurTec 

650 surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150453–20150457, 

substrate = 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = H/W. ................... 51

Fig. B-52 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with SurTec 650 surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150453, substrate = 1010 steel, and 

sample conditioning = H/W. Mode-of-failure = MM......................... 51

Fig. B-53 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with Bonderite 

M-NT 5700 surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150463–20150467, 

substrate = 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = H/W. ................... 52

Fig. B-54 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with Bonderite M-NT 5700 

surface pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150464, substrate = 1010 steel, 

and sample conditioning = H/W. Mode-of-failure = MM. ................. 52

Fig. B-55 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with Bonderite 

M-NT 7400 surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150473–20150477, 

substrate = 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = H/W. ................... 53

Fig. B-56 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with Bonderite M-NT 7400 

surface pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150473, substrate = 1010 steel, 

and sample conditioning = H/W. Mode-of-failure = MM. ................. 53

Fig. B-57 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with XBOND 

4000DM-DR surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150483–

20150487, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = H/W. . 54

Fig. B-58 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with XBOND 4000DM-DR 

surface pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150485, substrate = 1010 steel, 

and sample conditioning = H/W. Mode-of-failure = MM. ................. 54

Fig. B-59 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with 

ZIRCOBOND 4200 surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150493–

20150497, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = H/W. . 55

Fig. B-60 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with ZIRCOBOND 4200 surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150496, substrate = 1010 steel, and 

sample conditioning = H/W. Mode-of-failure = MM......................... 55
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

xi

List of Tables

Table 1 Aluminum 2024 T3, RT, H/W, and ET conditioning. Mode-of-failure: 

adhesive (ADH), cohesive (COH), and MM. ....................................... 8

Table 2 1010 mild steel, RT and H/W conditioning. ET conditioning not tested 

for steel samples. Mode-of-failure: ADH, COH, and MM................... 9

Table 3 Average property changes after H/W and ET conditioning................ 15

Table C-1 Supporting data collection .................................................................. 58
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

xii

Acknowledgments

This research was supported in part by the US Army Education Outreach – Science 

and Engineering Apprentice Program - College Qualified Leaders Program at the 

US Army Research Laboratory and was administered by Academy of Applied 

Science (under contract number W911SR-15-2-0001). Mr John Kelley and 

Mr Charles Pergantis are acknowledged for their insightful technical reviews.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

1

1. Introduction

The greatest costs during the life-cycle of a Department of Defense (DOD) weapon 

system are those incurred in the operations and support phase, as shown in Fig. 1.1

(Note: Figure 1 is illustrative versus quantitative. Adapted from “Operating and 

Support Cost-Estimating Guide”. Published by the Office of the Secretary of 

Defense, Cost Analysis Improvement Group, 1992.) With regards to adhesively 

bonded assemblies, these operating expenses generally result from failures in the 

field due to inferior pretreatments, the adhesive’s inability to withstand elevated 

temperature (ET), and/or moisture exposure conditions. Additionally, as 

environmental regulations force various chemicals from the commercial market, 

the pretreatments and adhesives containing regulatory banned constituents also 

become unavailable. This train of events leads to phase-out risks for ongoing 

maintenance of Army legacy platforms. One way to reduce life-cycle expenses is 

to focus on the environmental sustainability of the adhesive and surface 

pretreatment during initial research and development.

Fig. 1 Notional life-cycle costs for a DOD weapon system
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

2

The surface pretreatments utilized for this research are commercially available and 

qualified, or in the process of being qualified, under Federal Specification TT-C490F,

2 as with Type II or IV hexavalent chromium-free chemical conversion 

coatings. A majority of TT-C-490F qualified pretreatments were originally 

formulated as zinc-based pretreatments to prevent corrosion on steel, not as 

bonding surface pretreatments. If these environmentally friendly TT-C-490F 

pretreatments prove compatible for adhesive bonding then they could potentially 

function simultaneously as both corrosion inhibitors and adhesion promoters.

SCIGRIP SG805, which is methacrylate based and marketed for high-temperature 

applications,3 was the adhesive examined for this study. This adhesive was tested 

against screening standards protocols outlined in ARL-ADHES-QA-001.00 rev 

1.04 and for compatibility with the environmentally sustainable TT-C-490F Type 

IV surface pretreatments. Testing consisted of single-lap-joint shear tensile testing 

using 2024 T3 aluminum and 1010 mild steel specimens at room temperature (RT), 

after 14 d of hot/wet (H/W) immersion at 63 °C, and in-situ at an ET of 71 °C. 

Single-lap-joints are widely studied in the literature and allow for minimal labor 

intensive standardized testing.5 Adhesives that retain 75% of their dry maximum 

strength (Smax) after environmental conditioning and during in-situ ET testing are 

of interest. The methacrylate adhesive showed promising high-initial bond strength 

and H/W durability but was unable to meet ET performance retention requirements. 

The use of environmentally sustainable TT-C-490F pretreatments resulted in little 

to no loss of adhesive bond strength during H/W conditioning and their potential 

use as bonding promoters for adhesives is worthy of further investigation.

2. Experimental

2.1 Materials and Environmental Assessment

SCIGRIP SG805 methacrylate adhesive was used for bonding the single-lap-joints. 

The TT-C-490F surface pretreatments included Bonderite M-NT 7400 (Henkel 

Corporation), SurTec 650 (CST-Surtec, Inc.), and ZIRCOBOND 4200 (PPG 

Industries, Inc.). While qualified for TT-C-490F, Oxysilan 9810/2 (Chemetall US, 

Inc.) was not included due to sample nonavailability at the commencement of the 

study. Additional environmentally sustainable surface pretreatments, as claimed by 

the manufacturers, included Bonderite M-NT 5700 (Henkel Corporation), XBOND 

4000DM-DR (PPG Industries, Inc.), and AC-131 BB (3M Company). Grit blasting 

and an academic 3-aminopropyltrimethoxysilane (APS) coupling agent were used 

as performance comparisons with the TT-C-490F qualified and other commercial 

pretreatments.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

3

Appendix A lists associated environmental restrictions matched against the 

constitutive chemical components of the adhesive and surface pretreatments using 

the restricted substances database feature of the US Army Research Laboratory’s

Materials Selection and Analysis Tool (MSAT) database.6 The restricted 

substances database references chemical abstract service numbers reported in the 

manufacturer’s safety data sheets against current and pending environmental

legislation in North America, Europe, and Asia. The highest substance rating 

returned was “caution”. None of the constitutive chemical components of the 

adhesive and surface pretreatments used for this study were reported as being 

“banned” by any current or pending regulations.

2.2 Joint Geometry

The single-lap-joints were fabricated and tested using American Society for Testing 

and Materials (ASTM) D1002-10 as the basis standard, schematically represented 

in Fig. 2.

7

Fig. 2 Illustration of the adhesively bonded single-lap-joint test specimen configuration 

(refer to ASTM D1002-10 for dimensions)

Maximum strength (Smax) is calculated by dividing the maximum load (Pmax) by the 

bonded area (A). The overlap length is 12.7 mm and the joint width is 25.4 mm.

A

P S max

max =

Area in 

Test Grips

Area in 

Test Grips Bonded Area

Bondline

Top-down view

Side view

Overflow fillet
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

4

Maximum strength and mode-of-failure represent the accepted standard reported 

outputs of single-lap-joint testing in both industry and academia.8

2.2.1 Surface Preparation

Preparation of the methacrylate adhesive bonded single-lap-joints followed 

procedures outlined in ARL-ADHES-QA-001.01 rev 2.2.9 The single-lap-joint

substrates used 2024 T3 aluminum and 1010 steel coupons with an average 

thickness of approximately 1.60 and 1.52 mm, respectively. Sandpaper (180-grit 

aluminum oxide), an acetone wipe down, and an abrasive disc (3M Scotch-Brite 

Roloc, light grinding and blending disc, part number 60357) were used to initially 

remove oils and large deposits of oxide corrosion from the surfaces of the aluminum 

and steel. The coupons were then abrasive media blasted with clean and unused 60-

grit aluminum oxide. From this point forward, the intended bonding surface of each 

coupon came into contact only with its corresponding coupon’s grit-blasted 

bonding surface or air. After being blown off with a thin stream of nitrogen gas, the 

various TT-C-490F pretreatments were applied in accordance with their 

manufacturer’s instructions. All of the pretreatments except for the APS and 

AC-131 BB sol-gel were applied by dip-coating the coupons for 2 min (Fig. 3), 

rinsed for 30 s with deionized water, and again blown off with a thin stream of 

nitrogen gas to produce a thin, uniform coating. The APS was also applied using 

the dip-coat technique; however, the coupons were blown off with nitrogen gas 

immediately after and then placed in an oven for 1 h at 65 °C. The AC-131 BB sol 

gel was brush applied to the surface intended for bonding, allowed to wet for 2 min, 

and then immediately blown off with nitrogen gas. All surface preparation was 

completed within 4 h of bonding.

Fig. 3 Single-lap-joint coupons undergoing dip-coat pretreatment
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

5

2.2.2 Bonding

The methacrylate adhesive has a set time of 5 min, so it was imperative that the 

assembly components of the bonding tooling fixture were gathered beforehand to 

facilitate a quick-bonding process, as shown in Fig. 4. Bondline thickness and 

overlap dimension control were essential to reducing possible sources of 

experimental error. Spacer shims (0.762 mm) were used to set the bondline 

thickness. The tooling fixture is also equipped with alignment pins to set orientation 

and overlap length.9

Fig. 4 Single-lap-joint bonding tooling fixture components

A pneumatic gun with a static-mixing head was used to dispense the 2-part adhesive 

with the required 10:1 ratio, per the manufacturer’s recommendations.10 The 

methacrylate adhesive was applied to an area slightly larger than the overlap area 

of 12.7 × 25.4 mm at the front of each finger on the coupon. Bonding pressure was 

maintained by placing weights on top of the assembled tooling fixture to ensure 

intimate contact with the bondline thickness spacer shims while the adhesive was 

curing. Figure 5 shows the tooling fixture assembly stacking sequence. The cure 

cycle was 4 d at room temperature. In addition, the methacrylate adhesive was also 

cast into silicone molds and allowed to cure, to yield thin-rectangular specimen bars 

for use in dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA) testing.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

6

Fig. 5 Stacking assembly for fabrication of single-lap-joint panel

2.3 Testing

The MSAT database was used to collect the data following the workflow protocols 

outlined in ARL-TR-7696.11

2.3.1 Mechanical Testing

The test procedure for performing the breaking strengths of single-lap-joint samples 

was conducted in accordance to paragraphs 9.1 and 9.2 of ASTM D1002-10.7

instrumented mechanical testing frame with a 25-kN load cell was used to ensure 
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

7

that the breaking load of single-lap-joint samples fell between 15% and 85% of the 

cell’s full-scale capacity. A crosshead speed of 1.27 mm/min was used with a pair 

of self-aligning grips that held the outer 25.4 mm of each end of the single-lap-joint 

test sample.

H/W-conditioned samples were fully immersed in deionized (DI) water for 14 d at 

63 °C, prior to mechanical testing. Mechanical tests occurred on the same day as 

their removal from the heated bath. Once removed, samples were allowed to cool 

to RT and patted dry with paper towels prior to loading into the test frame. In-situ 

ET testing was conducted using a heated static oven that enclosed around the load 

frame, which was allowed to stabilize at a temperature of 71 °C, +/−3 °C for 45 min, 

prior to the start of mechanical testing. Before loading samples within the test grips, 

each single-lap-joint sample was allowed to rest at least 10 min at RT. Once placed 

within the grips, the thermocouple attached and the oven door closed and secured, 

the sample’s temperature was then monitored for 10 min with a digital thermometer 

until the sample reached equilibrium with the oven temperature and was stable. 

H/W and ET conditions, which were recommended per ARL-ADHES-QA-001.00 

rev 1.0,

4 were based on test method guidelines provided by Military Standard-810G 

(MIL-STD-810G), Environmental Engineering Considerations and Laboratory 

Tests.

12,13

Upon completion of mechanical testing, failure surfaces of each broken single-lapjoint coupon sample were digitally imaged using a flatbed scanner (HewlettPackard OfficeJet D145) and archived in MSAT. Failed test coupons were then 

manually labeled with a MSAT identification (ID) code, and this information was 

then embedded within the image, preserving data integrity by eliminating file 

naming errors. Images were scanned at 300-dots per inch (dpi) resolution and saved 

as a tagged image file format (TIFF), which is a common minimum 

recommendation for photo archiving.14 After the fractured surfaces were visually

inspected and examined, the tested coupons were assigned either an adhesive, 

cohesive, or mixed-mode (MM) type of failure designation. Load versus 

displacement plots and failure surface scans are provided in Appendix B.

2.3.2 Dynamic Mechanical Analysis

The small bulk adhesive rectangular sample bars made during the bonding process 

were sanded to uniform thickness using 60 grit followed by 180-grit aluminum 

oxide sandpaper. Thickness for single-cantilever DMA testing of the cured 

adhesive was between 2 and 4 mm. The samples were cut to a length of 

approximately 35 mm using a water saw from sections that were free of visible 

voiding defects. The thickness and width of a sample was measured using a 

telescoping micrometer before tightening it in the DMA clamps with a torque of 
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

8

0.79 N∙m. DMA was performed with a constant frequency of 1 Hz and a constant 

strain of 0.2%. The sample was equilibrated at 0 °C and held there for 10 min before 

being heated to 71 °C at a rate of 2 °C/min. Once this process was completed, the 

clamps were retightened, the length of the sample between the clamps was 

measured and recorded, and DMA was run a second time on the same sample. 

DMA testing yielded the storage modulus (E’), loss modulus (E’’), and loss tangent 

(tan δ) of the methacrylate adhesive, allowing for determination of the adhesive’s 

glass transition temperature (Tg).

3. Results

Sample sets were organized by substrate material, surface pretreatment, and 

conditioning method. Tables 1 and 2 provide a quantitative summary of tensile 

testing results along with associated modes of failure for the aluminum and steel 

single-lap-joints. Figures 6–9 show plots of maximum load and displacement at 

failure for the aluminum and steel joints. A load versus extension at complete 

failure plot is provided for each set, containing curves for all samples within that 

set. An example failure surface scan is included below each graph to show a 

representative sample for mode of failure confirmation. Complete records of test 

data and failure surface scans may be accessed at the National Institute of Standards 

and Technology Dspace repository site http://hdl.handle.net/11256/937. A 

summary of the data and supporting metadata descriptors are found in Appendix C.

Table 1 Aluminum 2024 T3, RT, H/W, and ET conditioning. Mode-of-failure: adhesive 

(ADH), cohesive (COH), and MM.

Surface 

pretreatment

RT conditioning H/W 

conditioning ET conditioning

Smax

(MPa)

dfailure

(mm)

Mode-offailureSmax

(MPa)

dfailure

(mm)

Mode-offailureSmax

(MPa)

dfailure

(mm)

Mode-offailure

Grit Blast 19.9

(+0.7)

1.59

(+0.16) MM 18.8(+0.8)

1.74

(+0.18) MM 8.45(+0.32)

2.40

(+0.35) MM

3-APS 11.2

(+1.1)

0.72

(+0.03) ADH 12.2(+0.8)

1.01

(+0.08) ADH 5.66(+0.46)

3.49

(+0.75) ADH

AC-131 20.6

(+0.2)

1.79

(+0.10) MM 19.4(+0.3)

2.14

(+0.09) MM Not tested

Not 

tested NA

SurTec-650 20.0

(+0.2)

1.59

(+0.08) MM 19.3(+0.6)

1.92

(+0.12) MM Not tested

Not 

tested NA

SerTec-5700 17.5

(+0.4)

1.34

(+0.20) ADH/MM 19.6(+0.1)

2.21

(+0.07) ADH/MM Not tested

Not 

tested NA

SerTec-7400 17.9

(+0.9)

1.48

(+0.32) ADH/MM 19.1(+0.2)

1.95

(+0.11) ADH/MM Not tested

Not 

tested NA

XBOND 20.1

(+0.8)

1.64

(+0.18) ADH/MM 19.4(+0.4)

1.91

(+0.13) ADH/MM Not tested

Not 

tested NA

ZIRCOBOND 20.7

(+0.5)

1.82

(+0.09) MM 19.5(+0.7)

2.05

(+0.17) MM Not tested

Not 

tested NA

NA = not applicable
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

9

Table 2 1010 mild steel, RT and H/W conditioning. ET conditioning not tested for steel 

samples. Mode-of-failure: ADH, COH, and MM.

Surface 

pretreatment

RT conditioning H/W 

conditioning

Smax

(MPa)

dfailure

(mm)

Mode-offailure Smax

(MPa)

dfailure

(mm)

Mode-offailure

AC-131 17.8

(±0.5)

1.51

(±0.10) MM 18.7(±0.4)

1.73

(+0.12) MM

SurTec-650 21.6

(±0.6)

1.95

(±0.08) MM 20.3(±0.7)

2.02

(+0.14) MM

SerTec-5700 20.9

(±0.5)

2.11

(+0.11) MM 20.6(±0.4)

2.02

(+0.08) MM

SerTec-7400 20.9

(±0.4)

1.94

(+0.06) MM 20.2(±0.5)

1.98

(+0.05) MM

XBOND 21.2

(±0.8)

1.89

(+0.07) MM 20.5(±0.3)

2.11

(+0.06) MM

ZIRCOBOND 20.6

(±0.5)

1.82

(+0.22) MM 19.4(±0.6)

1.97

(+0.11) MM

Fig. 6 Average maximum strength at failure (MPa) for aluminum 2024 T3, RT, H/W, and 

ET conditioning

19.9

18.8

8.45

11.2

12.2

5.66

20.6

19.4

0

20

19.3

0

17.5

19.6

0

17.9

19.1

0

20.1

19.4

0

20.7

19.5

0

0

5

10

15

20

25

Room Temperature (RT) Conditioning Hot/Wet (H/W) Conditioning Elevated Temperature (ET)

Conditioning

Smax (MPa) 0 0

Average Maximum Strength at Failure (MPa)

Surface Pretreatment on Aluminium Substrate

Grit Blast 3-APS AC-131 SurTec-650 SerTec-5700 SerTec-7400 XBOND ZIRCOBOND
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

10

Fig. 7 Average maximum displacement at failure (mm) for aluminum 2024 T3, RT, H/W, 

and ET conditioning

Fig. 8 Average maximum strength at failure (MPa) for 1010 mild steel, RT, and H/W 

conditioning. ET conditioning not tested for steel samples.

1.59

1.74

2.4

0.72

1.01

3.49

1.79

2.14

1.59

1.92

1.34

2.21

1.48

1.95

1.64

1.91 1.82

2.05

0

0.25

0.5

0.75

1

1.25

1.5

1.75

2

2.25

2.5

2.75

3

3.25

3.5

3.75

Room Temperature (RT)

Conditioning

Hot/Wet (H/W) Conditioning Elevated Temperature (ET)

Conditioning

Average Maximum Displacement at Failure (mm)

Surface Pretreatment on Aluminium Substrate

Grit Blast 3-APS AC-131 SurTec-650 SerTec-5700 SerTec-7400 XBOND ZIRCOBOND

17.8

18.7

21.6

20.3

20.9 20.6 20.9

20.2

21.2

20.6 20.5

19.4

0

5

10

15

20

25

Room Temperature (RT) Conditioning Hot/Wet (H/W) Conditioning

Ave. Smax (MPa) 0

Average Maximum Strength at Failure (MPa)

Surface Pretreatment on Steel Substrate 

AC-131 SurTec-650 SurTec-5700 SurTec-7400 XBOND ZIRCOBOND
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

11

Fig. 9 Average maximum displacement at failure (mm) for 1010 mild steel, RT, and H/W 

conditioning. ET conditioning not tested for steel samples.

4. Discussion

The bonded single-lap-joints with the SG805 adhesive and sustainable TT-C-490F 

pretreatments yielded strengths of approximately 19 MPa. A majority of the 

aluminum lap joints, and all of the steel lap joints, had mixed-mode failure. At RT, 

the SG805 mechanical performance using the aluminum coupons with the gritblasted surface preparation was comparable to the chemical pretreatments (Fig. 10), 

including similar failure modes as shown in Fig. 11. The grit-blasted samples also 

retained approximately 94% of their dry strength following H/W conditioning, as 

summarized in Table 3. The results for the grit-blasted samples are consistent with 

observations for methacrylate adhesive usage for dental applications, both with and 

without added silane coupling agent pretreatments, where good long-term wet 

durability is essential.15–17 Steel single-lap-joints with a grit-blast-only surface 

pretreatment were not tested.

1.51

1.73

1.95 2.02 2.11 2.02

1.94 1.98

1.89

2.11

1.82

1.97

0

0.25

0.5

0.75

1

1.25

1.5

1.75

2

2.25

2.5

2.75

3

3.25

3.5

3.75

Room Temperature (RT) Conditioning Hot/Wet (H/W) Conditioning

Ave. dfailure (mm)

Average Maximum Displacement at Failure (mm)

Surface Pretreatment on Steel Substrate

AC-131 SurTec-650 SurTec-5700 SurTec-7400 XBOND ZIRCOBOND
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

12

Fig. 10 Load vs. displacement response for aluminum single-lap-joints pretreated by grit 

blasting and with ZIRCOBOND TT-C-490F Type IV surface pretreatment

Fig. 11 Failure surfaces for aluminum single-lap-joint with grit-blasted surface (left) and 

ZIRCOBOND 4200 (right) pretreatments

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

0 0.5 1 1.5 2

Load (N)

Displacement (mm)

Aluminum - ZIRCOBOND

Aluminum - Grit Blast

Aluminum pretreated with grit blast Aluminum pretreated with ZIRCOBOND 4200
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

13

The aluminum samples with the APS pretreatment had lower strengths and 

displacements to failure when compared with the TT-C-490F pretreatments as 

shown in Fig. 12. The amine functionality of the APS should be reactive toward the 

methacrylate groups of the adhesive through a Michael addition mechanism18 but 

was perhaps negated by the cure kinetics or other additives present in the adhesive, 

as seen by the adhesive mode-of-failure in Fig. 13. Methacrylate functional silane 

coupling agents have been shown to enhance adhesion with methacrylate-based 

adhesives and may show higher strengths with SG805.

19

The steel single-lap-joints samples pretreated with AC-131 showed visual flash 

corrosion during its application. This phenomenon was not observed in any of the 

other pretreatments, and the corresponding load versus displacement response 

shown in Fig. 12 depicts lower peak properties than the TT-C-490F Type IV 

qualified pretreatments. The AC-131 pretreatment is a water-based system and was 

applied via brush wetting rather than the dip-coating technique used for the other 

chemical pretreatments. The brush-wetting method allows for air exposure and 

provides the corrosive environment necessary for an oxide layer to form. The 

failure surfaces of the steel joints treated with AC-131 showed adhesive mode-offailure with evidence of the flash corrosion seen on the adhesive and steel adherend. 

The AC-131 provided comparable strengths when applied to the aluminum joints, 

as summarized in Table 1.

Fig. 12 Load vs. displacement response for aluminum single-lap-joints pretreated with APS, 

steel samples pretreated with AC-131, and steel and aluminum pretreated with ZIRCOBOND 

TT-C-490F Type IV surface pretreatment

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

0 0.5 1 1.5 2

Load (N)

Displacement (mm)

Aluminum - ZIRCOBOND

Steel - ZIRCOBOND

Steel - AC-131 BB

Aluminum - APS
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

14

Fig. 13 Failure surfaces for aluminum single-lap-joint pretreated with APS (left) and steel 

pretreated with AC-131 (right)

Comparison within the aluminum and steel adherends shows similar, if not 

increased, performance of the SG805 methacrylate adhesive after H/W

conditioning, as summarized in Table 3. The adhesive was likely undergoing 

additional postcure at the 63 °C temperature of the H/W conditioning, which can 

lead to an increase in strength. For an adhesive systems to pass the screening 

testing, it is required to retain 75% of its RT strength after H/W conditioning, which 

the SG805 methacrylate adhesive achieved.

Aluminum pretreated with APS Steel pretreated with AC-131
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

15

Table 3 Average property changes after H/W and ET conditioning

Surface 

pretreatment

2024 T3 Aluminum 1010 mild steel

Average strength

(Smax) retention after 

conditioning

(%)

Average displacement 

(dfailure) change after

conditioning

(%)

Average strength

(Smax) retention 

after conditioning

(%)

Average 

displacement 

(dfailure) change 

after conditioning 

(%)

H/W

conditioning

(ET)

conditioning

H/W

conditioning

(ET)

conditioning H/W conditioning

Grit Blast 94 42 9 51 NA NA

3-APS 109 51 39 385 NA NA

AC-131 106 NA 20 NA 105 15

SurTec-650 104 NA 21 NA 106 4

SerTec-5700 112 NA 65 NA 101 4

SerTec-7400 107 NA 32 NA 103 2

XBOND 103 NA 16 NA 103 12

ZIRCOBOND 106 NA 13 NA 106 8

Elevated temperature testing showed a significant decrease in bond performance, 

as shown in Fig. 14. The grit blasted single-lap-joint strength decreased from 

19.9 MPa at RT to 8.45 MPa at 71 °C, for only a 42% retention in strength. Elevated

temperature performance in the absence of moisture exposure is unlikely to degrade 

due to the surface pretreatment and is more reliant on the bulk adhesive properties. 

Although the lap joints pretreated with 3-APS displayed a high-average extension 

to failure of 3.49 mm, this was largely due to tensile failure of the adhesive after it 

had de-bonded from the substrate (Fig. 15). Elevated temperature testing was 

conducted at 71 °C, which is within the glass transition region of this adhesive, as 

shown in the storage and loss modulus DMA plot in Fig. 16. As the adhesive moves 

from the glassy to rubbery state, it becomes more ductile and is unable to sustain 

the high loads that are possible at lower temperatures.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

16

Fig. 14 Load vs. displacement response for grit-blasted aluminum single-lap-joints tested at 

RT and 71 °C

Fig. 15 Failure surfaces for grit-blasted aluminum single-lap-joints tested at RT (left) and 

71°C (right)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Load (N)

Displacement (mm)

RT

71 °C

Aluminum pretreated with grit blast - RT Aluminum pretreated with grit blast – 71 °C
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

17

Fig. 16 Storage modulus (E’) and loss modulus (E’’) vs. temperature for SG805

5. Conclusions

SG805 was tested against ARL-ADHES-QA-001.00 rev 1.0 and for compatibility 

with the environmentally sustainable TT-C-490F surface pretreatments. Testing 

consisted of single-lap-joint shear tensile testing using aluminum and steel 

specimens with RT, H/W, and ET conditioning. The SG805 methacrylate adhesive 

was found to be suitable for RT and H/W conditions but showed excessive loss of 

strength at ET. At RT and after H/W conditioning the adhesive performed well on 

both aluminum and steel substrates, even when no chemical surface pretreatment 

was applied. Environmentally sustainable TT-C-490F Type IV inorganic 

pretreatments resulted in little to no loss of adhesive bond strength during H/W

conditioning and their potential use as bonding pretreatments is worthy of further 

investigation. The TT-C-490F pretreatments offer the advantage of corrosion 

protection, which should be considered for bonding applications. Further research 

with the SG805 methacrylate adhesive is warranted for applications with lower 

service temperature requirements.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

0 25 50 75 100 125 150

E' (GPa)

E'' (MPa)

Temperature (°C)
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

18

6. References

1. Jones G, White E, Ryan E, Ritschel J. Investigation into the ratio of operating 

and support costs to life-cycle costs for DOD weapon systems. Defense 

Acquisition Research Journal. 2014;21(1):442–464.

2. Federal specification TT-C-490F w/amendment 3. Chemical conversion 

coatings and pretreatments for metallic substrates (base for organic coatings).

Aberdeen Proving Ground (MD): Army Research Laboratory (US);

2016 Feb 29.

3. SCIGRIP launches new MMA adhesive with increased thermal resistance. 

Cincinnati (OH): CompositesWorld; c2017 [accessed 2016 Sep 9].

http://www.compositesworld.com/products/scigrip-launches-new-mma

-adhesive-with-increased-thermal-resistance.

4. Jensen R, DeSchepper D, Flanagan D, Kosik-Chaney W, Robinette J, 

Chaney G, Pergantis C. Adhesives: test method, group assignment, and 

categorization guide for high-loading-rate applications. Aberdeen Proving 

Ground (MD): Army Research Laboratory (US); 2014 Jun. Report No.: ARLSR-288.

5. da Silva LFM, Carbas RJC, Critchlow GW, Figueiredo MAV, Brown K. Effect 

of material, geometry, surface treatment and environment on the shear strength 

of single lap joints. International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives. 

2009;(29):621–632.

6. MSAT uses GRANTA MI as the base software operating package. Available: 

www.grantadesign.com/products/mi/. ARL’s MSAT database is housed and 

supported by NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL. 

7. ASTM D1002-10. Standard test method for apparent shear strength of singlelap-joint adhesively bonded metal specimens by tension loading (metal-tometal). West Conshohocken (PA): ASTM International; 2010. DOI: 

10.1520/D1002-10, www.astm.org.

8. Alia C, Jofre-Reche JA, Suarez JC, Arenas JM, Martin-Martinez JM. Influence 

of post-curing temperature on the structure, properties, and adhesion of vinyl 

ester adhesive. Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology. 2015;(29):518–

531.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

19

9. Jensen R, DeSchepper D, Flanagan D, Chaney G, Pergantis C. Adhesives: test 

method, group assignment, and categorization guide for high-loading-rate 

applications – preparation and testing of single lap joints. ARL-ADHES-QA001.00 rev 2.2. Aberdeen Proving Ground (MD): Army Research Laboratory 

(US); 2016 Apr. Report No.: ARL-SR-0356.

10. Technical data sheet, SG800 methacrylate adhesives, SCIGRIP Americas. 

[accessed 2015 Feb]. http://www.scigrip.com/product.php?id=150.

11. Jensen R, DeSchepper D, Flanagan D. Multivariate analysis of high throughput adhesively bonded single lap joints: experimental and workflow protocols. 

Aberdeen Proving Ground (MD): Army Research Laboratory (US); 2016 June. 

Report No.: ARL-TR-7696.

12. MIL-STD-810G. Department of Defense test method standard, environmental 

engineering considerations and laboratory tests. Laboratory test method 507.5, 

humidity. Aberdeen Proving Ground, (MD): Army Developmental Test 

Command (US); 2008 Oct 31.

13. MIL-STD-810G. Department of Defense test method standard, environmental 

engineering considerations and laboratory tests. Laboratory test method 501.5, 

high temperature. Aberdeen Proving Ground, (MD): Army Developmental 

Test Command (US); 2008 Oct 31.

14. Digital imaging standards. Hartford (CT): Office of the Public Records 

Administrator, Connecticut State Library; 2014.

15. Valente LL, Sarkis-Onofre R, Gonçalves AP, Fernández E, Loomans B, 

Moraes RR. Repair bond strength of dental composites: systematic review and 

meta-analysis. International Journal of Adhesion & Adhesives. 2016;(69):15–

26.

16. Mustafa AA, Matinlinna JP, Saidin S, Abdul Kadir MR. The influence of 

experimental silane primers on dentin bond strength and morphology: A 

laboratory and finite element analysis study. The Journal of Prosthetic 

Dentistry. 2014;(112):1498–1506.

17. Song L, Ye Q, Ge X, Misra A, Spencer P. Mimicking nature: Selfstrengthening properties in a dental adhesive. Acta Biomaterialia. 2016;(35):

138–152.

18. Mather B, Viswanathan K, Miller K, Long T. Michael addition reactions in 

macromolecular design for emerging technologies. Progress in Polymer 

Science. 2006;(31):487–531.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

20

19. Ginzburg-Turgeman R, Guion JP, Mandler D. Improving the adhesion of 

polymethacrylate thin films onto indium tin oxide electrodes using a silanebased, molecular adhesive. Journal of Solid State Electrochemistry. 2011;15:

2401–2407.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

21

Appendix A. Environmental Restrictions Listed against the 

Adhesive and Surface Pretreatments
22

US Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation 

and Liability Act (CERCLA) hazardous substances NA

US EPA Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act 

(EPCRA) Section 314, Toxic Chemicals NA

US EPA EPA's List of Lists (LoL) NA

US EPA

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

(NESHAP) for Stationary Reciprocating Internal 

Combustion Engines-US Air Toxics Regulations

NA

AeroSpace and Defence 

Industries Association of 

Europe - (ASD)

ASD-Standardization Declarable Substances List Caution

US EPA EPCRA-Section 304, Extremely Hazardous Substances, 

Reportable Quality (RQ) NA

European Trade Union 

Confederation (ETUC) ETUC Priority List Caution

European Chemical 

Agency (ECHA) Community Rolling Action Plan (CoRAP) List Caution

Bonderite M-NT 7400

•TT-C-490F

•TYPE IV, CLASS A, DEGREASE 

AND ABRASIVE BLAST and TYPE 

IV, CLASS B AND CLASS C

SurTec 650 ChromitAL

•TT-C-490F

•TYPE IV, CLASS A, DEGREASE 

AND ABRASIVE BLAST

ZIRCOBOND 4200DM-DR

•TT-C-490F

•TYPE IV, CLASS A, DEGREASE 

AND ABRASIVE BLAST and TYPE 

IV, CLASS B AND CLASS C

Bonderite M-NT 5700

XBOND 4000DM-DR

Legislation 

Rating

SG805 Adhesive

Legistrative 

Organization

US EPA

US EPA

Adhesive or Surface 

Pretreatment

Substance 

Name

CAS 

Number

Substance 

Rating Legislation Name

Methyl 

Methacrylate 80-62-6 Caution

Phosphoric 

Acid 7664-38-2 Caution CERCLA hazardous substances NA

Zirconium 

Potassium 

Fluoride

16923-95-8 Caution CERCLA hazardous substances NA

Cupric Nitrate 3251-23-8 Caution

No hazardous substance ratings associated with CAS numbers provided in manufacturer's safety data sheet.

CERCLA hazardous substances NA

No hazardous ingredients claimed in manufacturer's safety data sheet.

US EPA

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
23

US EPA CERCLA hazardous substances NA

US EPA EPA's List of Lists (LoL) NA

ASD ASD-STAN Declarable Substances List Caution

US EPA EPCRA Section 304, Extremely Hazardous Substances, RQ NA

US EPA CERCLA hazardous substances NA

US EPA EPCRA Section 313, Toxic Chemicals NA

US EPA The EPA's List of Lists (LoL) NA

NESHAP-US Air Toxics Regulations NA

US EPA NESHAP for Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion 

Engines NA

ASD ASD-STAN Declarable Substances List Caution

European Union (EU) Directive 1996/82/EC (Seveso II) on the control of majoraccident hazards involving dangerous substances NA

US EPA EPCRA Section 304, Extremely Hazardous Substances, RQ NA

EU Global Automotive Declarable Substance List (GADSL) Caution

ETUC ETUC Priority List Caution

ECHA Community Rolling Action Plan (CoRAP) List Caution

APS

Aluminum Oxide Grit Blast

OXSILAN 9810/2 US EPA CERCLA hazardous substances NA

•TT-C-490F US Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS) Chemicals of Concern (CoC) NA

US EPA EPCRA Section 304, Extremely Hazardous Substances, 

Reportable Quality (RQ) NA

US EPA EPCRA Section 313, Toxic Chemicals NA

US EPA Clean Air Act Section 112(R): Accidental Release 

Prevention/Risk Management Plan Rule NA

US EPA EPA's List of Lists (LoL) NA

ASD ASD-STAN Declarable Substances List Caution

US EPA EPCRA Section 302, Extremely Hazardous Substances, 

Threshold Planning Quantity (TPQ) NA

Legislation 

Rating

Legistrative 

Organization

Adhesive or Surface 

Pretreatment

Substance 

Name

CAS 

Number

Substance 

Rating Legislation Name

AC-131 BB Methanol 67-56-1 Caution

AC-131 BB Acetic Acid 64-19-7 Caution

•TYPE IV, CLASS A, DEGREASE 

AND ABRASIVE BLAST and TYPE 

IV, CLASS B AND CLASS C

No hazardous substance ratings associated with CAS numbers provided in manufacturer's safety data sheet.

CAS number 1344-24-1 list as “Caution” for fibrous forms only.

Nitric Acid 7697-37-2 Caution

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

24

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

25

Appendix B. Load versus Displacement Curves and Failure 

Surface Scans
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

26

Complete records of test data and failure surface scans may be accessed at the 

National Institute of Standards and Technology Dspace repository site

http://hdl.handle.net/11256/937.

B.1 Substrate = 2024 T3 Aluminum, Sample Conditioning = Room 

Temperature (RT)

Fig. B-1 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with aluminum oxide grit 

blast surface pretreatment. Materials Selection and Analysis Tool (MSAT) identifications 

(IDs) = 20150215–20150219, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, sample conditioning = RT.

Fig. B-2 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with aluminum oxide grit blast surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150215, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning 

= RT. Mode-of-failure = mixed-mode (MM).
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

27

Fig. B-3 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with 

3-aminopropyltrimethoxysilane surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150225–20150229, 

substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning = RT.

Fig. B-4 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with 3-aminopropyltrimethoxysilane surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150225, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning 

= RT. Mode-of-failure = adhesive.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

28

Fig. B-5 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with AC-131 BB surface 

pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150235–20150239, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample 

conditioning = RT.

Fig. B-6 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with AC-131 BB surface pretreatment. MSAT 

ID = 20150235, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning = RT. Mode-offailure = MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

29

Fig. B-7 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with SurTec 650 surface 

pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150245–20150249, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample 

conditioning = RT.

Fig. B-8 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with SurTec 650 surface pretreatment. MSAT 

ID = 20150245, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning = RT. Mode-offailure = MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

30

Fig. B-9 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with Bonderite M-NT 5700 

surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150255–20150259, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and 

sample conditioning = RT.

Fig. B-10 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with Bonderite M-NT 5700 surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150255, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning 

= RT. Mode-of-failure = adhesive/ MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

31

Fig. B-11 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with Bonderite M-NT 7400 

surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150265–20150269, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and 

sample conditioning = RT.

Fig. B-12 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with Bonderite M-NT 7400 surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150265, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning 

= RT. Mode-of-failure = adhesive/ MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

32

Fig. B-13 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with XBOND 4000DM-DR 

surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150275–20150279, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and 

sample conditioning = RT.

Fig. B-14 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with XBOND 4000DM-DR surface

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150275, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning 

= RT. Mode-of-failure = adhesive/ MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

33

Fig. B-15 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with ZIRCOBOND 4200 

surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150285–20150289, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and 

sample conditioning = RT.

Fig. B-16 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with ZIRCOBOND 4200 surface pretreatment. 

MSAT ID = 20150285, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning = RT. Modeof-failure = MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

34

B.2 Substrate = 2024 T3 Aluminum, Sample Conditioning = Hot/Wet (H/W)

Fig. B-17 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with aluminum oxide grit 

blast surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150220–20150224, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, 

and sample conditioning = H/W.

Fig. B-18 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with aluminum oxide grit blast surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150222, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning 

= H/W. Mode-of-failure = MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

35

Fig. B-19 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with 3-

aminopropyltrimethoxysilane surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150230–20150234, 

substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning = H/W.

Fig. B-20 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with 3-aminopropyltrimethoxysilane surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150230, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning 

= H/W. Mode-of-failure = adhesive.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

36

Fig. B-21 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with AC-131 BB surface 

pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150240–20150244, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample 

conditioning = H/W.

Fig. B-22 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with AC-131 BB surface pretreatment. MSAT 

ID = 20150240, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning = H/W. Mode-offailure = MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

37

Fig. B-23 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with SurTec 650 surface 

pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150250–20150254, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample 

conditioning = H/W.

Fig. B-24 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with SurTec 650 surface pretreatment. MSAT 

ID = 20150250, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning = H/W. Mode-offailure = MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

38

Fig. B-25 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with Bonderite M-NT 5700 

surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150260–20150264, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and 

sample conditioning = H/W.

Fig. B-26 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with Bonderite M-NT 5700 surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150260, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning 

= H/W. Mode-of-failure = adhesive/ MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

39

Fig. B-27 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with Bonderite M-NT 7400 

surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150270–20150274, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and 

sample conditioning = H/W.

Fig. B-28 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with Bonderite M-NT 7400 surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150270, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning 

= H/W. Mode-of-failure = adhesive/ MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

40

Fig. B-29 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with XBOND 4000DM-DR 

surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150280–20150284, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and 

sample conditioning = H/W.

Fig. B-30 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with XBOND 4000DM-DR surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150280, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning 

= H/W. Mode-of-failure = adhesive/ MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

41

Fig. B-31 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with ZIRCOBOND 4200 

surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150290–20150294, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and 

sample conditioning = H/W.

Fig. B-32 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with ZIRCOBOND 4200 surface pretreatment. 

MSAT ID = 20150290, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and sample conditioning = H/W. Modeof-failure = MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

42

B.3 Substrate = 2024 T3 Aluminum, Test Conditions = Elevated 

Temperature (ET)

Fig. B-33 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with aluminum oxide grit 

blast surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150871–20150875, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, 

and test conditions = ET.

Fig. B-34 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with aluminum oxide grit blast surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150871, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and test conditions = ET. 

Mode-of-failure = MM.

-500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 Load (N)

Extension (mm)
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

43

Fig. B-35 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with 3-

aminopropyltrimethoxysilane surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150388–20150392, 

substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and test conditions = ET.

Fig. B-36 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with 3-aminopropyltrimethoxysilane 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150388, substrate = 2024 T3 aluminum, and test conditions = ET

Mode-of-failure = adhesive.

-500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

-1 0 1 2 3 4 5 Load (N)

Extension (mm)
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

44

B.4 Substrate = 1010 Steel, Sample Conditioning = RT

Fig. B-37 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with AC-131 BB surface 

pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150438–20150442, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample 

conditioning = RT.

Fig. B-38 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with AC-131 BB surface pretreatment. MSAT 

ID = 20150438, substrate = 1010 steel, sample conditioning = RT. Mode-of-failure = MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

45

Fig. B-39 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with SurTec 650 surface 

pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150448–20150452, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample 

conditioning = RT.

Fig. B-40 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with SurTec 650 surface pretreatment. MSAT 

ID = 20150448, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = RT. Mode-of-failure = MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

46

Fig. B-41 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with Bonderite M-NT 5700 

surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150458–20150462, substrate = 1010 steel, sample 

conditioning = RT.

Fig. B-42 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with Bonderite M-NT 5700 surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150461, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = RT. 

Mode-of-failure = MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

47

Fig. B-43 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with Bonderite M-NT 7400 

surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150468–20150472, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample 

conditioning = RT.

Fig. B-44 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with Bonderite M-NT 7400 surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150468, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = RT. 

Mode-of-failure = MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

48

Fig. B-45 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with XBOND 4000DM-DR 

surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150478–20150482, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample 

conditioning = RT.

Fig. B-46 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with XBOND 4000DM-DR surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150478, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = RT. 

Mode-of-failure = MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

49

Fig. B-47 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with ZIRCOBOND 4200 

surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150488–20150492, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample 

conditioning = RT.

Fig. B-48 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with ZIRCOBOND 4200 surface pretreatment. 

MSAT ID = 20150492, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = RT. Mode-of-failure 

= MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

50

B.5 Substrate = 1010 Steel, Sample Conditioning = H/W

Fig. B-49 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with AC-131 BB surface 

pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150443–20150447, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample 

conditioning = H/W.

Fig. B-50 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with AC-131 BB surface pretreatment. MSAT 

ID = 20150443, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = H/W. Mode-of-failure = MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

51

Fig. B-51 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with SurTec 650 surface 

pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150453–20150457, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample 

conditioning = H/W.

Fig. B-52 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with SurTec 650 surface pretreatment. MSAT 

ID = 20150453, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = H/W. Mode-of-failure = MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

52

Fig. B-53 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with Bonderite M-NT 5700 

surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150463–20150467, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample 

conditioning = H/W.

Fig. B-54 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with Bonderite M-NT 5700 surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150464, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = H/W. 

Mode-of-failure = MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

53

Fig. B-55 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with Bonderite M-NT 7400 

surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150473–20150477, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample 

conditioning = H/W.

Fig. B-56 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with Bonderite M-NT 7400 surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150473, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = H/W. 

Mode-of-failure = MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

54

Fig. B-57 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with XBOND 4000DM-DR 

surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150483–20150487, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample 

conditioning = H/W.

Fig. B-58 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with XBOND 4000DM-DR surface 

pretreatment. MSAT ID = 20150485, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = H/W. 

Mode-of-failure = MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

55

Fig. B-59 Load vs. extension (displacement) for single-lap-joints with ZIRCOBOND 4200 

surface pretreatment. MSAT IDs = 20150493–20150497, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample 

conditioning = H/W.

Fig. B-60 Failure surfaces for single-lap-joint with ZIRCOBOND 4200 surface pretreatment. 

MSAT ID = 20150496, substrate = 1010 steel, and sample conditioning = H/W. Mode-of-failure 

= MM.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

56

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

57

Appendix C. Supporting Digital File Archive Index
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

58

Table C-1 provides the reader with a reference list and URL (uniform resource 

locator) links to experimental data and supporting metadata descriptors archived in 

the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) DSpace repository

http://hdl.handle.net/11256/937.

Table C-1 Supporting data collection

File namea Description

Aluminum joints

Size: 301.1 MB

Format: MS Excel, TIFF, PDF

Lab notes, load versus displacement data, and failure 

surface images

Steel joints

Size: 206.9 MB

Format: MS Excel, TIFF, PDF

Lab notes, load versus displacement data, and failure 

surface images

DMA

Size: 2.213 MB

Format: MS Excel and csv text

Dynamic mechanical analysis storage and loss 

modulus

Technical data sheets

Size: 5.910 MB

Format: PDF

Manufacturer technical and safety data sheets

Restricted substances

Size: 22.38 KB

Format: MS Excel

Currents and pending environmental legislations

Calibration certs

Size: 9.393 MB

Format: PDF

Calibration certificates for test equipment used

a

Abbreviated file name as it appears on NIST site.
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

59

List of Symbols, Abbreviations, and Acronyms

A bonded area

ADH adhesive mode-of-failure

APS 3-aminopropyltrimethoxysilane

ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials

COH cohesive mode-of-failure

cond. conditioning

csv comma-separated values

DMA dynamic mechanical analysis

DOD Department of Defense

dpi dots per inch

E’ storage modulus

E’’ loss modulus

ET elevated temperature

ID sample identification number

min minute

mm millimeter

MM mixed-mode mode-of-failure

MPa megapascal

MS Microsoft

MSAT Materials Selection and Analysis Too

NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology

Pmax maximum load

PDF portable document format

RT room temperature

Smax maximum strength
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

60

Tg glass transition temperature

tan δ loss tangent

TIFF tagged image file format

txt text file format

URL uniform resource locator

ZIP archive file format
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

61

1 DEFENSE TECHNICAL

(PDF) INFORMATION CTR

DTIC OCA

2 DIRECTOR

(PDF) US ARMY RESEARCH LAB

RDRL CIO L

IMAL HRA MAIL & RECORDS

MGMT

1 GOVT PRINTG OFC

(PDF) A MALHOTRA

4 DIR USARL

(PDF) RDRL WMM C

D DESCHEPPER

D FLANAGAN

R JENSEN

J SNYDER
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

62

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.