Gerald Boggs

I use a jeweler's bracelet mandrel and a leather mallet. I do the initial curve the same way as you would make a ring, that way I never actually hit the twisted section and then open it to the desired size on the mandrel.

No, just steel. the color on some of them is a reflection. These are mostly 7 1/2 inches long. I started with 6 inches of 1/4 square. Flattened the ends and that gave me 6 1/2, which curved around a wrist mandrel works out to 7 1/2.

A Christmas order, twisted bracelets a galore

That which makes me the most money for my effort.

Swedish anvils are some of the poorest quality anvil s out there, much better to stay with an American anvil.

I have been extremely happy with the two Swedish anvils I have. It's really a matter of personal preference, but I would take a Swedish anvil before all others. As for forge vs cast, not much difference that I've found, it's all in the type of steel, the heat treatment and quality of manufacturing.

No, he shows starting with a bar the diameter of the head and drawing down the body to the desired size. I think the lesson is in his workshop series, no the UN ones.

Yes, others do, Joseph Stokes shows this method in one of his training manuals when forging a pair of tongs. As the only time I forge rivets, is for a 1 inch wide head on a 1/2 inch body, I'm too lazy to use this method :-) Works great on smaller rivets.

Split bolsters, great idea. As I'm looking for the heads to be the same size, it's always been tricky as to how much to upset the end before heading it in the bolster. I'm pretty standard on how long my 1/2 inch rivets are, so I'd only need to make a few of them.

It's interesting the last two examples used are of items that are anything but unique in design.

Acid works great. I've thought about using phosphoric acid for it's reported ability of converting rust into a protective coating that can be painted.

12 years ago, I brazed a batch of lanterns together. The gentleman I worked for has one hanging in his gallery. I go out that way from time to time, next time I'll take a look.

Unheated shop, hanging up on the wall. Time: several months. Humidity is high in Virginia, this is part of the South. I do think heat and humidity play a big part. Most of the folks that claim not to have this problem, live elsewhere then the South. I tried this once. If you recall a twisted basket railing I posted back in 2008? I think I read about it on Iforge and so scrubbed them off in warm soapy water. Less them a month after installation, I got a phone call from the clients about a white powder forming on the baskets. Cost me a lot of time (money) to fix them and I've NEVER gotten a single call from the (million dollar plus homes) builder for more work. Trying that little trick has probably cost me many thousands of lost dollars.

A while back, (Not on this forum) the subject of what effect borax has on iron over time was discussed. I put forth that forged welded architectural ironwork that were welded with the aid of borax, needed to have the borax chemically removed (Vineger). I was told I was wrong, that simply cleaning well with a wire brush was all that was needed. However, my personal experiences and the experiences of many other smiths, disputes this claim. Rather then argue, I decided to run a test on the effects of borax on iron. I forge welded three rings (I use them for crosses) One I vigorously wire brushed by hand. The second, I repeated the wire brushing and then wire brushed with a wire disc on a angle grinder. The third, I put overnight in vinegar and then washed in warm water with a little baking soda. Here are the results after several months, left to right as written. My experience says it doesn't matter if you wax or paint, it you don't do something beyond simply wire brushing, you'll get a build up of this white crud. Exceptions to this: If I sandblast prior to painting When I forge weld the reins on the tongs, I set the boss by heating and cooling in water. I'm guessing the explosive reaction is akin to sandblasting. I speculate that climate and humidity have a factor in this.

We may have a confusion in language. If you visit Fred Crist's web site, just what is his "Style"? His work ranges from Gothic to abstract sculpture. I mean come on, you're telling me you can tell the difference by "style" between Fred Crist's Gothic work and that of someone that lived a 100 years ago? "If the work is distinctive, you shouldn't copy or imitate it for profit without permission." This I agree with, but only as related to individual pieces. Fred over the years has loaned me studies to take home and study :-) I would never copy verbatium those studies, but I would use everything I could get from them.

Fred Crist or Tom Joyce? And the third is by Fred Crist and the fourth by Tom Joyce. Except for a person intimate with the individual's work, how would one distinguish one artist from the other. I recognize Fred's work only because his shop is five minutes from mine and I've spent many hours there. I don't recognize Fred's "style" but I do recognize his "Hand" My point is: There are no styles that are distinctive to only one artist. We can recognize a single piece as something a specific artist made, but not a style as being distinctive only to that artist.

Actually, the only person's work I would recognize as that's person's is Albert Paley's and mostly because he's one of the few that have done large scale sculptural public works. While Elizabeth Brim certainly has done interesting things with the inflation of hot welded shapes, she is not the first to use the method. As for the rest, while I'm familiar with their work, nothing they're done is uniquely theirs. As for the last part, I have no idea what you're trying to say.

Could you provide an example. I can't think of anyone who has a style so distinct, that it's recognizable as "theirs" I know smiths who show the influence of whom they trained with. But the next level up is the same, showing the influence of those with whom they trained with. And so on and so on. At one time, you could buy "Mark Aspery style tongs" I won't say who was selling them, but Mark laughed/groined at the idea that the way he made his tongs were distinctive as "His" Yet before I meet him, I had never seen anyone make tongs quite like his.

Questions: Are you sure Mr. Brazeal is the originator of that style of bottle opener? Might not he have seen someone else making something along those lines. Not saying he isn't, just an observation I've notice on Iforge; the first person that post something on Iforge is forever given credit as the "Originator" I've notice a couple of ideas that came first from Habermman, that are credited to others. Mr. Brazeal takes money while teaching that bottle opener. If I pay you to teach me something, I'm going to use it in my own business. Is that wrong?

An honest explanation of the practical application. But that's not going to happen, as this math has no application to the blacksmith. All I'll get is more words, but no answer.

You have written many words, but you still have't wrote anything of practical use. In short, the article has no practical applicaiton for the working smith. Practical: of or concerned with the actual doing or use of something rather than with theory and ideas.

Thank you for taking the time. To physicists, there doesn't have to be a practical application And that's fine, but in the article it was presented as having practical application to blacksmiths.

So be kind to us and give us a example of where a working smith would use this information. I don't fight change, I had been working in blacksmith shops for seven years and one day a smith came up, watched me hammer and said "Try doing it this way" In a moment I when from one method to the next and never looked back. But I won't just nod my head and agree to something I think is not valid.

No, it has no application. My take on the article, is it's nothing more then an attempt by the author to get attention. This is part of the opening paragraph. "If it is necessary to do more work or larger jobs, just use a bigger hammer and/or swing it faster. But, should the anvil be correspondingly larger? That seems to make sense, since the anvil could no longer be considered immovable when hit with a larger hammer. Not only might the anvil no longer be immovable,but it might be damaged." To the novice blacksmith this might sound both clever and true, but true it is not. Trying to use a bigger hammer then one is use to or swinging faster are the hallmarks of the poorly trained smith. If the author believes this... Then there's a bunch of gobbledegook that has no application to the working smith The conclusion of the article "There you have it. Tell your partner that for good forging efficiency you just gotta buy a bigger anvil." The only reason to use a bigger anvil, is because you like a bigger anvil.

Without including the earth, how in even a little way, is this useful knowledge? I read the article published in 2011/early 2012? (I'm a member of CBA) You could call it "controversy" if that's the word you use for "not supported by practical experience."