Designation: D 3359 – 02

Standard Test Methods for

Measuring Adhesion by Tape Test1
This standard is issued under the fixed designation D 3359; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (e) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.

This standard has been approved for use by agencies of the Department of Defense.

1. Scope Related Coating Products2

1.1 These test methods cover procedures for assessing the D 823 Practices for Producing Films of Uniform Thickness
adhesion of coating films to metallic substrates by applying and of Paint, Varnish, and Related Products on Test Panels2
removing pressure-sensitive tape over cuts made in the film. D 1000 Test Method For Pressure-Sensitive Adhesive-
1.2 Test Method A is primarily intended for use at job sites Coated Tapes Used for Electrical and Electronic Applica-
while Test Method B is more suitable for use in the laboratory. tions3
Also, Test Method B is not considered suitable for films thicker D 1730 Practices for Preparation of Aluminum and
than 5 mils (125µm). Aluminum-Alloy Surfaces for Painting4
D 2092 Guide for Preparation of Zinc-Coated (Galvanized)
NOTE 1—Subject to agreement between the purchaser and the seller, Steel Surfaces for Painting5
Test Method B can be used for thicker films if wider spaced cuts are
employed.
D 2370 Test Method for Tensile Properties of Organic
Coatings2
1.3 These test methods are used to establish whether the D 3330 Test Method for Peel Adhesion of Pressure-
adhesion of a coating to a substrate is at a generally adequate Sensitive Tape 6
level. They do not distinguish between higher levels of D 3924 Specification for Standard Environment for Condi-
adhesion for which more sophisticated methods of measure- tioning and Testing Paint, Varnish, Lacquer, and Related
ment are required. Materials2
NOTE 2—It should be recognized that differences in adherability of the D 4060 Test Method for Abrasion Resistance of Organic
coating surface can affect the results obtained with coatings having the Coatings by the Taber Abraser2
same inherent adhesion.
3. Summary of Test Methods
1.4 In multicoat systems adhesion failure may occur be-
tween coats so that the adhesion of the coating system to the 3.1 Test Method A—An X-cut is made through the film to
substrate is not determined. the substrate, pressure-sensitive tape is applied over the cut and
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the then removed, and adhesion is assessed qualitatively on the 0
standard. The values given in parentheses are for information to 5 scale.
only. 3.2 Test Method B—A lattice pattern with either six or
1.6 This standard does not purport to address the safety eleven cuts in each direction is made in the film to the
concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility substrate, pressure-sensitive tape is applied over the lattice and
of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and then removed, and adhesion is evaluated by comparison with
health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory descriptions and illustrations.
limitations prior to use. 4. Significance and Use
2. Referenced Documents 4.1 If a coating is to fulfill its function of protecting or
2.1 ASTM Standards: decorating a substrate, it must adhere to it for the expected
D 609 Practice for Preparation of Cold-Rolled Steel Panels service life. Because the substrate and its surface preparation
for Testing Paint, Varnish, Conversion Coatings, and (or lack of it) have a drastic effect on the adhesion of coatings,
a method to evaluate adhesion of a coating to different
substrates or surface treatments, or of different coatings to the
1
These test methods are under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee D01 on
2
Paint and Related Coatings, Materials, and Applications and are the direct Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 06.01.
3
--`,`,``````,,,,``,,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

responsibility of Subcommittee D01.23 on Physical Properties of Applied Paint Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 10.01.
4
Films. Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 02.05.
5
Current edition approved Aug. 10, 2002. Published October 2002. Originally Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 06.02.
6
published as D 3359 – 74. Last previous edition D 3359 – 97. Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 15.09.

Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.

Copyright ASTM International 1

Provided by IHS under license with ASTM Licensee=Sherwin Williams/5920464001
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale, 06/28/2007 14:00:46 MDT
 D 3359 – 02
--`,`,``````,,,,``,,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
same substrate and treatment, is of considerable usefulness in clean and dry. Extremes in temperature or relative humidity
the industry. may affect the adhesion of the tape or the coating.
4.2 The limitations of all adhesion methods and the specific 7.1.1 For specimens which have been immersed: After
limitation of this test method to lower levels of adhesion (see immersion, clean and wipe the surface with an appropriate
1.3) should be recognized before using it. The intra- and solvent which will not harm the integrity of the coating. Then
inter-laboratory precision of this test method is similar to other dry or prepare the surface, or both, as agreed upon between the
widely-accepted tests for coated substrates (for example, Test purchaser and the seller.
Method D 2370 and Test Method D 4060), but this is partly the 7.2 Make two cuts in the film each about 40 mm (1.5 in.)
result of it being insensitive to all but large differences in long that intersect near their middle with a smaller angle of
adhesion. The limited scale of 0 to 5 was selected deliberately between 30 and 45°. When making the incisions, use the
to avoid a false impression of being sensitive. straightedge and cut through the coating to the substrate in one
steady motion.
TEST METHOD A—X-CUT TAPE TEST 7.3 Inspect the incisions for reflection of light from the
metal substrate to establish that the coating film has been
5. Apparatus and Materials
penetrated. If the substrate has not been reached make another
5.1 Cutting Tool—Sharp razor blade, scalpel, knife or other X in a different location. Do not attempt to deepen a previous
cutting devices. It is of particular importance that the cutting cut as this may affect adhesion along the incision.
edges be in good condition. 7.4 Remove two complete laps of the pressure-sensitive
5.2 Cutting Guide—Steel or other hard metal straightedge tape from the roll and discard. Remove an additional length at
to ensure straight cuts. a steady (that is, not jerked) rate and cut a piece about 75 mm
5.3 Tape—25-mm (1.0-in.) wide semitransparent pressure- (3 in.) long.
sensitive tape7 with an adhesion strength agreed upon by the 7.5 Place the center of the tape at the intersection of the cuts
supplier and the user is needed. Because of the variability in with the tape running in the same direction as the smaller
adhesion strength from batch-to-batch and with time, it is angles. Smooth the tape into place by finger in the area of the
essential that tape from the same batch be used when tests are incisions and then rub firmly with the eraser on the end of a
to be run in different laboratories. If this is not possible the test pencil. The color under the transparent tape is a useful
method should be used only for ranking a series of test indication of when good contact has been made.
coatings. 7.6 Within 90 6 30 s of application, remove the tape by
5.4 Rubber Eraser, on the end of a pencil. seizing the free end and pulling it off rapidly (not jerked) back
5.5 Illumination—A light source is helpful in determining upon itself at as close to an angle of 180° as possible.
whether the cuts have been made through the film to the 7.7 Inspect the X-cut area for removal of coating from the
substrate. substrate or previous coating and rate the adhesion in accor-
dance with the following scale:
6. Test Specimens
5A No peeling or removal,
6.1 When this test method is used in the field, the specimen 4A Trace peeling or removal along incisions or at their intersection,
is the coated structure or article on which the adhesion is to be 3A Jagged removal along incisions up to 1.6 mm (1⁄16 in.) on either side,
2A Jagged removal along most of incisions up to 3.2 mm (1⁄8 in.) on either
evaluated. side,
6.2 For laboratory use apply the materials to be tested to 1A Removal from most of the area of the X under the tape, and
panels of the composition and surface conditions on which it is 0A Removal beyond the area of the X.
desired to determine the adhesion. 7.8 Repeat the test in two other locations on each test panel.
NOTE 3—Applicable test panel description and surface preparation For large structures make sufficient tests to ensure that the
methods are given in Practice D 609 and Practices D 1730 and D 2092. adhesion evaluation is representative of the whole surface.
NOTE 4—Coatings should be applied in accordance with Practice 7.9 After making several cuts examine the cutting edge and,
D 823, or as agreed upon between the purchaser and the seller. if necessary, remove any flat spots or wire-edge by abrading
NOTE 5—If desired or specified, the coated test panels may be subjected lightly on a fine oil stone before using again. Discard cutting
to a preliminary exposure such as water immersion, salt spray, or high
tools that develop nicks or other defects that tear the film.
humidity before conducting the tape test. The conditions and time of
exposure will be governed by ultimate coating use or shall be agreed upon 8. Report
between the purchaser and seller.
8.1 Report the number of tests, their mean and range, and
7. Procedure for coating systems, where the failure occurred that is, between
7.1 Select an area free of blemishes and minor surface first coat and substrate, between first and second coat, etc.
imperfections. For tests in the field, ensure that the surface is 8.2 For field tests report the structure or article tested, the
location and the environmental conditions at the time of
testing.
7
Permacel 99, manufactured by Permacel, New Brunswick, NJ 08903, and 8.3 For test panels report the substrate employed, the type of
available from various Permacel tape distributors, is reported to be suitable for this coating, the method of cure, and the environmental conditions
purpose. The manufacturer of this tape and the manufacturer of the tape used in the
interlaboratory study (see RR: D01-1008), have advised this subcommittee that the
at the time of testing.
properties of these tapes were changed. Users of it should, therefore, check whether 8.4 If the adhesion strength of the tape has been determined
current material gives comparable results to previous supplied material. in accordance with Test Methods D 1000 or D 3330, report the

Copyright ASTM International 2

Provided by IHS under license with ASTM Licensee=Sherwin Williams/5920464001
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale, 06/28/2007 14:00:46 MDT
 D 3359 – 02
results with the adhesion rating(s). If the adhesion strength of 12. Procedure
the tape has not been determined, report the specific tape used 12.1 Where required or when agreed upon, subject the
and its manufacturer. specimens to a preliminary test before conducting the tape test
8.5 If the test is performed after immersion, report immer- (see Note 3). After drying or testing the coating, conduct the
sion conditions and method of sample preparation. tape test at room temperature as defined in Specification
9. Precision and Bias 8 D 3924, unless D 3924 standard temperature is required or
agreed.
9.1 In an interlaboratory study of this test method in which
operators in six laboratories made one adhesion measurement 12.1.1 For specimens which have been immersed: After
on three panels each of three coatings covering a wide range of immersion, clean and wipe the surface with an appropriate
adhesion, the within-laboratories standard deviation was found solvent which will not harm the integrity of the coating. Then
to be 0.33 and the between-laboratories 0.44. Based on these dry or prepare the surface, or both, as agreed upon between the
standard deviations, the following criteria should be used for purchaser and the seller.
judging the acceptability of results at the 95 % confidence 12.2 Select an area free of blemishes and minor surface
level: imperfections, place on a firm base, and under the illuminated
9.1.1 Repeatability—Provided adhesion is uniform over a magnifier, make parallel cuts as follows:
large surface, results obtained by the same operator should be 12.2.1 For coatings having a dry film thickness up to and
considered suspect if they differ by more than 1 rating unit for including 2.0 mils (50 µm) space the cuts 1 mm apart and make
two measurements. eleven cuts unless otherwise agreed upon.
9.1.2 Reproducibility—Two results, each the mean of trip- 12.2.2 For coatings having a dry film thickness between 2.0
licates, obtained by different operators should be considered mils (50 µm) and 5 mils (125 µm), space the cuts 2 mm apart
suspect if they differ by more than 1.5 rating units. and make six cuts. For films thicker than 5 mils use Test
9.2 Bias cannot be established for these test methods. Method A.11
12.2.3 Make all cuts about 20 mm (3⁄4 in.) long. Cut through
TEST METHOD B—CROSS-CUT TAPE TEST the film to the substrate in one steady motion using just
10. Apparatus and Materials sufficient pressure on the cutting tool to have the cutting edge
10.1 Cutting Tool9—Sharp razor blade, scalpel, knife or reach the substrate. When making successive single cuts with
other cutting device having a cutting edge angle between 15 the aid of a guide, place the guide on the uncut area.
and 30° that will make either a single cut or several cuts at 12.3 After making the required cuts brush the film lightly
once. It is of particular importance that the cutting edge or with a soft brush or tissue to remove any detached flakes or
edges be in good condition. ribbons of coatings.
10.2 Cutting Guide—If cuts are made manually (as opposed 12.4 Examine the cutting edge and, if necessary, remove
to a mechanical apparatus) a steel or other hard metal straight- any flat spots or wire-edge by abrading lightly on a fine oil
edge or template to ensure straight cuts. stone. Make the additional number of cuts at 90° to and
10.3 Rule—Tempered steel rule graduated in 0.5 mm for centered on the original cuts.
measuring individual cuts. 12.5 Brush the area as before and inspect the incisions for
10.4 Tape, as described in 5.3. reflection of light from the substrate. If the metal has not been
10.5 Rubber Eraser, on the end of a pencil. reached make another grid in a different location.
10.6 Illumination, as described in 5.5. 12.6 Remove two complete laps of tape and discard. Re-
10.7 Magnifying Glass—An illuminated magnifier to be move an additional length at a steady (that is, not jerked) rate
used while making individual cuts and examining the test area. and cut a piece about 75 mm (3 in.) long.
12.7 Place the center of the tape over the grid and in the area
11. Test Specimens of the grid smooth into place by a finger. To ensure good
11.1 Test specimens shall be as described in Section 6. It contact with the film rub the tape firmly with the eraser on the
should be noted, however, that multitip cutters10 provide good end of a pencil. The color under the tape is a useful indication
results only on test areas sufficiently plane that all cutting edges of when good contact has been made.
contact the substrate to the same degree. Check for flatness 12.8 Within 90 6 30 s of application, remove the tape by
with a straight edge such as that of the tempered steel rule seizing the free end and rapidly (not jerked) back upon itself at
(10.3). as close to an angle of 180° as possible.
12.9 Inspect the grid area for removal of coating from the
8
Supporting data are available from ASTM International Headquarters. Request substrate or from a previous coating using the illuminated
RR: D01–1008. magnifier. Rate the adhesion in accordance with the following
9
Multiblade cutters are available from a few sources that specialize in testing
equipment for the paint industry. One supplier that has assisted in the refinement of
scale illustrated in Fig. 1:
these methods is given in footnote 10.
10
The sole source of supply of the multitip cutter for coated pipe surfaces known
to the committee at this time is Paul N. Gardner Co., 316 NE First St., Pompano
11
Beach, FL 33060. If you are aware of alternative suppliers, please provide this Test Method B has been used successfully by some people on coatings greater
information to ASTM International Headquarters. Your comments will receive than 5 mils (0.13 mm) by spacing the cuts 5 mm apart. However, the precision
careful consideration at a meeting of the responsible technical committee,1 which values given in 14.1 do not apply as they are based on coatings less than 5 mm (0.13
you may attend. mm) in thickness.

--`,`,``````,,,,``,,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASTM International 3

Provided by IHS under license with ASTM Licensee=Sherwin Williams/5920464001
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale, 06/28/2007 14:00:46 MDT
 D 3359 – 02
5B The edges of the cuts are completely smooth; none of the squares of the
lattice is detached.
4B Small flakes of the coating are detached at intersections; less than 5 %
of the area is affected.
3B Small flakes of the coating are detached along edges and at intersec-
tions of cuts. The area affected is 5 to 15 % of the lattice.
2B The coating has flaked along the edges and on parts of the squares.
The area affected is 15 to 35 % of the lattice.
1B The coating has flaked along the edges of cuts in large ribbons and
whole squares have detached. The area affected is 35 to 65 % of the
lattice.
0B Flaking and detachment worse than Grade 1.

12.10 Repeat the test in two other locations on each test

panel.
13. Report
13.1 Report the number of tests, their mean and range, and
for coating systems, where the failure occurred, that is,
between first coat and substrate, between first and second coat,
etc.
13.2 Report the substrate employed, the type of coating and
the method of cure.
13.3 If the adhesion strength has been determined in accor-
dance with Test Methods D 1000 or D 3330, report the results

--`,`,``````,,,,``,,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
with the adhesion rating(s). If the adhesion strength of the tape
has not been determined, report the specific tape used and its
manufacturer.
13.4 If the test is performed after immersion, report immer-
sion conditions and method of sample preparation.
14. Precision and Bias 8
14.1 On the basis of two interlaboratory tests of this test
method in one of which operators in six laboratories made one
adhesion measurement on three panels each of three coatings
covering a wide range of adhesion and in the other operators in
six laboratories made three measurements on two panels each FIG. 1 Classification of Adhesion Test Results
of four different coatings applied over two other coatings, the
pooled standard deviations for within- and between-
laboratories were found to be 0.37 and 0.7. Based on these 14.1.2 Reproducibility—Two results, each the mean of du-
standard deviations, the following criteria should be used for plicates or triplicates, obtained by different operators should be
judging the acceptability of results at the 95 % confidence considered suspect if they differ by more than two rating units.
level: 14.2 Bias cannot be established for these test methods.
14.1.1 Repeatability—Provided adhesion is uniform over a
large surface, results obtained by the same operator should be 15. Keywords
considered suspect if they differ by more than one rating unit 15.1 adhesion; crosscut adhesion test method; tape; tape
for two measurements. adhesion test method; X-cut adhesion test method

Copyright ASTM International 4

Provided by IHS under license with ASTM Licensee=Sherwin Williams/5920464001
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale, 06/28/2007 14:00:46 MDT
 D 3359 – 02
APPENDIX

(Nonmandatory Information)

X1. COMMENTARY

X1.1 Introduction of film removal observed when the tape is pulled off. Since an
X1.1.1 Given the complexities of the adhesion process, can intact film with appreciable adhesion is frequently not removed
adhesion be measured? As Mittal (1)12 has pointed out, the at all, the severity of the test is usually enhanced by cutting into
answer is both yes and no. It is reasonable to state that at the the film a figure X or a cross hatched pattern, before applying
present time no test exists that can precisely assess the actual and removing the tape. Adhesion is then rated by comparing
physical strength of an adhesive bond. But it can also be said film removed against an established rating scale. If an intact
that it is possible to obtain an indication of relative adhesion film is peeled cleanly by the tape, or if it debonds just by
performance. cutting into it without applying tape, then the adhesion is rated
X1.1.2 Practical adhesion test methods are generally of two simply as poor or very poor, a more precise evaluation of such
types: “implied” and “direct.” “Implied” tests include inden- films not being within the capability of this test.
tation or scribe techniques, rub testing, and wear testing. X1.3.2 The current widely-used version was first published

--`,`,``````,,,,``,,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Criticism of these tests arises when they are used to quantify in 1974; two test methods are covered in this standard. Both
the strength of adhesive bonding. But this, in fact, is not their test methods are used to establish whether the adhesion of a
purpose. An “implied” test should be used to assess coating coating to a substrate is at an adequate level; however they do
performance under actual service conditions. “Direct” mea- not distinguish between higher levels of adhesion for which
surements, on the other hand, are intended expressly to more sophisticated methods of measurement are required.
measure adhesion. Meaningful tests of this type are highly Major limitations of the tape test are its low sensitivity,
sought after, primarily because the results are expressed by a applicability only to coatings of relatively low bond strengths,
single discrete quantity, the force required to rupture the and non-determination of adhesion to the substrate where
coating/substrate bond under prescribed conditions. Direct failure occurs within a single coat, as when testing primers
tests include the Hesiometer and the Adherometer (2). Com- alone, or within or between coats in multicoat systems. For
mon methods which approach the direct tests are peel, lap- multicoat systems where adhesion failure may occur between
shear, and tensile tests. or within coats, the adhesion of the coating system to the
substrate is not determined.
X1.2 Test Methods X1.3.3 Repeatability within one rating unit is generally
X1.2.1 In practice, numerous types of tests have been used observed for coatings on metals for both methods, with
to attempt to evaluate adhesion by inducing bond rupture by reproducibility of one to two units. The tape test enjoys
different modes. Criteria deemed essential for a test to warrant widespread popularity and is viewed as “simple” as well as low
large-scale acceptance are: use of a straightforward and unam- in cost. Applied to metals, it is economical to perform, lends
biguous procedure; relevance to its intended application; re- itself to job site application, and most importantly, after
peatability and reproducibility; and quantifiability, including a decades of use, people feel comfortable with it.
meaningful rating scale for assessing performance. X1.3.4 When a flexible adhesive tape is applied to a coated
X1.2.2 Test methods used for coatings on metals are: peel rigid substrate surface and then removed, the removal process
adhesion or “tape testing;” Gardner impact flexibility testing; has been described in terms of the “peel phenomenon,” as
and adhesive joint testing including shear (lap joint) and direct illustrated in Fig. X1.1.
tensile (butt joint) testing. These tests do not strictly meet all X1.3.5 Peeling begins at the “toothed” leading edge (at the
the criteria listed, but an appealing aspect of these tests is that right) and proceeds along the coating adhesive/interface or the
in most cases the equipment/instrumentation is readily avail- coating/substrate interface, depending on the relative bond
able or can be obtained at reasonable cost. strengths. It is assumed that coating removal occurs when the
X1.2.3 A wide diversity of tests methods have been devel- tensile force generated along the latter interface, which is a
oped over the years that measure aspects of adhesion (1-5). function of the rheological properties of the backing and
There generally is difficulty, however, in relating these tests to adhesive layer materials, is greater than the bond strength at the
basic adhesion phenomena. coating-substrate interface (or cohesive strength of the coat-
X1.3 The Tape Test ing). In actuality, however, this force is distributed over a
discrete distance (O-A) in Fig. X1.1, which relates directly to
X1.3.1 By far the most prevalent test for evaluating coating the properties described, not concentrated at a point (O) in Fig.
“adhesion” is the tape-and-peel test, which has been used since X1.1 as in the theoretical case—though the tensile force is
the 1930’s. In its simplest version a piece of adhesive tape is greatest at the origin for both. A significant compressive force
pressed against the paint film and the resistance to and degree arises from the response of the tape backing material to being
stretched. Thus both tensile and compressive forces are in-
12
The boldface numbers in parentheses refer to the list of references at the end
volved in adhesion tape testing.
of this test method. X1.3.6 Close scrutiny of the tape test with respect to the

Copyright ASTM International 5

Provided by IHS under license with ASTM Licensee=Sherwin Williams/5920464001
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale, 06/28/2007 14:00:46 MDT
 D 3359 – 02
interference/radio frequency interference (EMI/RFI) coatings,
it was found that, while peel was indeed consistent for a given
coating, the value varied by 25 % between the highest and
lowest ratings among coatings. Several factors that contribute
to these differences include coating composition and topology:
as a result, no single tape is likely to be suitable for testing all
coatings. Further, the tape test does not give an absolute value
for the force required for bond rupture, but serves only as an
indicator that some minimum value for bond strength was met
or exceeded (7, 8).
X1.6 Procedural Problems
X1.6.1 The tape test is operator intensive. By design it was
made as simple as possible to perform, and requires a mini-
mum of specialized equipment and materials that must meet
certain specifications. The accuracy and precision depend
largely upon the skill of the operator and the operator’s ability
FIG. X1.1 Peel Profile (6) to perform the test in a consistent manner. Key steps that
directly reflect the importance of operator skill include the
nature of the tape employed and certain aspects of the angle and rate of tape removal and the visual assessment of the
procedure itself reveal several factors, each or any combination tested sample. It is not unexpected that different operators
of which can dramatically affect the results of the test as might obtain different results (7, 8).
discussed (6). X1.6.2 Peel Angle and Rate:
The standard requires that the free end of the tape be
X1.4 Peel Adhesion Testing on Plastic Substrates removed rapidly at as close to a 180° angle as possible. If the
X1.4.1 Tape tests have been criticized when used for peel angle and rate vary, the force required to remove the tape
substrates other than metal, such as plastics. The central issues can change dramatically. Nearly linear increases were observed
are that the test on plastics lacks reproducibility and does not in peel force approaching 100 % as peel angle was changed
relate to the intended application. Both concerns are well from 135 to 180, and similar large differences can be expected
founded: poor precision is a direct result of several factors in peel force as peel rate varies. These effects are related as
intrinsic to the materials employed and the procedure itself. they reflect certain rheological properties of the backing and
More importantly, in this instance the test is being applied adhesive that are molecular in origin. Variation in pull rate and
beyond its intended scope. These test methods were designed peel angle can effect large differences in test values and must
for relatively ductile coatings applied to metal substrates, not be minimized to assure reproducibility (9).
for coatings (often brittle) applied to plastic parts (7). The X1.6.3 Visual Assessment:
unique functional requirements of coatings on plastic sub- The final step in the test is visual assessment of the coating
strates cause the usual tape tests to be unsatisfactory for removed from the specimen, which is subjective in nature, so
measuring adhesion performance in practice. that the coatings can vary among individuals evaluating the
same specimen (9).
X1.5 The Tape Controversy X1.6.3.1 Performance in the tape test is based on the
X1.5.1 With the withdrawal from commerce of the tape amount of coating removed compared to a descriptive scale.
specified originally, 3M No. 710, current test methods no The exposure of the substrate can be due to factors other than
longer identify a specific tape. Differences in tapes used can coating adhesion, including that arising from the requirement
lead to different results as small changes in backing stiffness that the coating be cut (hence the synonym“ cross-hatch
and adhesive rheology cause large changes in the tension area. adhesion test”). Justification for the cutting step is reasonable
Some commercial tapes are manufactured to meet minimum as cutting provides a free edge from which peeling can begin
standards. A given lot may surpass these standards and thus be without having to overcome the cohesive strength of the
suitable for general market distribution; however, such a lot coating layer.
may be a source of serious and unexpected error in assessing X1.6.3.2 Cutting might be suitable for coatings applied to
adhesion. One commercially available tape test kit had in- metal substrates, but for coatings applied to plastics or wood,
cluded a tape with adhesion strength variations of up to 50 % the process can lead to a misleading indication of poor
claimed by the manufacturer. Also, because tapes change on adhesion due to the unique interfacial zone. For coatings on
storage, bond strengths of the tape may change over time (7, 8). soft substrates, issues include how deep should this cut
X1.5.2 While there are tapes available that appear to deliver penetrate, and is it possible to cut only to the interface?
consistent performance, a given tape does not adhere equally X1.6.3.3 In general, if adhesion test panels are examined
well to all coatings. For example, when the peel removal force microscopically, it is often clearly evident that the coating
of the tape (from the coating) used earlier by Task Group removal results from substrate failure at or below the interface,
D01.23.10 to establish precision of the method, by 3M No. 710 and not from the adhesive failure between the coating and the
was examined with seven different electromagnetic substrate. Cohesive failure within the coating film is also
--`,`,``````,,,,``,,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASTM International 6

Provided by IHS under license with ASTM Licensee=Sherwin Williams/5920464001
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale, 06/28/2007 14:00:46 MDT
 D 3359 – 02
frequently observed. However, with the tape test, failures variation in test results due to temperature and humidity
within the substrate or coating layers are rare because the tape changes and their effect upon tape, coating and substrate.
adhesive is not usually strong enough to exceed the cohesive
strengths of normal substrates and organic coatings. Although X1.7 Conclusion
some rather brittle coatings may exhibit cohesive failure, the X1.7.1 All the issues aside, if these test methods are used
tape test adhesion method does not make provision for giving within the Scope Section and are performed carefully, some
failure locality (7, 8). insight into the approximate, relative level of adhesion can be
X1.6.4 Use of the test method in the field can lead to gained.

REFERENCES

(1) Mittal, K. L., “Adhesion Measurement: Recent Progress, Unsolved Journal, Vol 70, Nos. 50 and 51, 1991, pp. 36–40 and 36–51,
Problems, and Prospects”, “Adhesion Measurement of Thin Films, respectively.
Thick Films, and Bulk Coatings,” ASTM STP 640, ASTM, 1978, pp. (6) Souheng, Wu, Polymer Interface and Adhesion, Marcel Dekker, Inc.,
7–8. New York, NY, 1982, p. 531.
(2) Corcoron, E. M., “Adhesion,” Chapter 5.3, Paint Testing Manual, 13th (7) Nelson, G. L., Gray, K. N., and Buckley, S. E., Modern Paint and
ed., ASTM STP 500, ASTM, 1972, pp. 314–332. Coatings, Vol 75, No. 10, 1985, pp. 160–172.
(8) Nelson, G. L., and Gray, K. N., “Coating Adhesion to Plastics,”
(3) Gardner, H. A., and Sward, G. G., Paint Testing Manual, 12th ed.,
Proceedings, Waterborne and Higher Solids Coatings Symposium, Vol
Chapter 7, Gardner Laboratory, Bethesda, MD, 1962, pp. 159–170.
13, New Orleans, LA, February 5–7, 1986, pp. 114–131.
(4) Mittal, K. L., Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology, Vol 1, No. (9) K. L. Mittal, ed., “Symposium on Adhesion Aspects of Polymeric
3, 1987, pp. 247–259. Coatings,” Proceedings, The Electrochemical Society, 1981, pp.
(5) Stoffer, J. O., and Gadodia, S. K., American Paint and Coatings 569–582.

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

Committee D01 has identified the location of selected changes to this standard since the last issue
(D 3359 - 97) that may impact the use of this standard.

(1) Deleted reference to Test Method D 2197 in Referenced (2) Added 7.1.1, 8.5, 12.1.1, and 13.4 to clarify use when
Documents section and editorially changed footnote 10 to testing samples that have been immersed.
avoid confusion with another adhesion test method.

ASTM International takes no position respecting the validity of any patent rights asserted in connection with any item mentioned
in this standard. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any such patent rights, and the risk
of infringement of such rights, are entirely their own responsibility.

This standard is subject to revision at any time by the responsible technical committee and must be reviewed every five years and
if not revised, either reapproved or withdrawn. Your comments are invited either for revision of this standard or for additional standards
and should be addressed to ASTM International Headquarters. Your comments will receive careful consideration at a meeting of the
responsible technical committee, which you may attend. If you feel that your comments have not received a fair hearing you should
make your views known to the ASTM Committee on Standards, at the address shown below.

This standard is copyrighted by ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959,
United States. Individual reprints (single or multiple copies) of this standard may be obtained by contacting ASTM at the above
address or at 610-832-9585 (phone), 610-832-9555 (fax), or [email protected] (e-mail); or through the ASTM website
(www.astm.org).

--`,`,``````,,,,``,,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASTM International 7

Provided by IHS under license with ASTM Licensee=Sherwin Williams/5920464001
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale, 06/28/2007 14:00:46 MDT