Latticino

Members
  • Content count

    875
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Latticino

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Upstate NY
  • Interests
    Blacksmithing, bladesmithing, glassblowing, restoring and playing antique flutes. HLG and boomerangs, recumbent bicycles, sea kayaking, white water canoeing, reading SF/Fantasy

Recent Profile Visitors

4,983 profile views
  1. Mini Camping Cleaver

    Steve, I wasn't necessarily indicating that you were mistaken, (just offering my opinion, which is different from yours - a subtle contrast I agree, but a significant one). As regards the Health inspector, I'm sure they have to err on the side of caution, and, as with most "general" code enforcement officials have a list of things they need to check off for compliance. Needless to say, commercial and residential codes are different, as are each individuals interpretation of the specific language of a code. Also, codes are often simplified past the point of scientific proof, to make things easier for those using them. Again, per my post, I'm not in favor of crevices in cooling implements, but surface variations (like hammer marks or even the residual imperfections caused by removed scale) don't appear to be a cause for alarm. That being said, all the kitchen knives I've made to date have had fully ground and polished surfaces. However, I'm a fan of both Nick Rossi's and Sam Salvati's kitchen knives which at times have "Brut d'Forge" style flats at the top, and I wouldn't turn up my nose at a Bob Kramer Damascus chef knife either (even though the etching left minor surface irregularities).
  2. Mini Camping Cleaver

    My understanding of the seasoning process for cast iron pots is that it includes baking on successive layers of food safe oil or shortening. I'm not sure that is practical for a wood handled cleaver. Also, in use the cast iron is heated quite a bit which should kill off any remaining bugs. Again, this will not be the case for a cleaver. On the other hand, I don't have any trouble with a well cleaned forge finish for the flats of a kitchen knife. After wire brushing vigorously to remove any scale remnants and typical avoidance of cracks or cold shunts, basic kitchen cleaning after use with a kitchen brush should take care of any remaining food deposits (as noted by HammerMonkey above). I'm not any kind of fan of using poorly forged rasp knives (where the surface teeth are either left in place to be used as "graters", or hammered down for a bold pattern) for kitchen implements as that will leave extremely hard to clean areas, but I'm not a NYC master chef either...
  3. Please note that adequate ventilation is just as important with a gas forge as a solid fuel forge. Possibly even more so as the combustion byproducts are harder to sense and more insidious (not to mention the potential for a gas leak ruining your day). Hopefully your new system solves this, but this can be a major safety concern. At bare minimum I would strongly recommend that you get a good CO monitor and install it in your forging space.
  4. Ethan, Don't feel that you need to quote my whole post if you are directly following it. Not going to go into a great deal of research, but looking at the Gameco link you furnished, I saw only the recommended forge size for a single 1/2" burner. Doing the math quickly for that, I come out with a recommended forge size for that burner of 0.125 cubic feet (215 cubic inches), which seem reasonable from my experience. I find it very hard to believe that they are recommending two of these burners as being adequate for 1 cubic foot of forge volume (at least to get up to any kind of acceptable heat), but I suppose it is possible. One of the big problems with using gas forges is that they aren't as versatile as solid fuel forges. For efficient gas forging you will often find you need several different forge body configurations to allow forging of different stock and end products. A forge for heat treating armor plate is very different from a bladesmithing forge. Many of us try to design our first gas forge to be able to do too many different things, and it results in a forge that doesn't do any of the above well (and is usually too large as well).
  5. This rule of thumb is for a well insulated (say 2" of high temperature insulating material with a k-value equivalent to high temperature ceramic blanket) forge with an efficient burner. The Gameco burner appears to be the latter, but you have given no details on how you plan on insulating your forge. However, one cubic foot is the equivalent of 1,728 cubic inches. That is a very large forge. Are you certain they meant one cubic foot of internal volume? Hopefully you are not planning on building that large of a gas forge, as the typical newbie gas forge mistake is to build it too large. Are these fire bricks insulating , or hard bricks? The rules of thumb for forge volume to burner capacity, in my opinion, have more to do with the associated forge outside surface area and door size than actual interior volume. There is also a minimum amount of interior volume that each burner needs to fully develop combustion as well, but that is a bit harder to predict. Adding insulating bricks to the inside of a forge will decrease the volume of the chamber, but the bricks will be prone to cracking and damage over time (and it doesn't change the forge surface area or door configuration). Adding hard bricks to the forge interior will add thermal mass, which will make your forge heat up and cool down significantly slower, but they will last longer than soft brick provided they are not thermally cycled too abruptly (but you have the same issue with forge surface and doors). You will need to be careful that you don't provide any thermal paths "through" the hard firebrick to the forge exterior (all sides of the hard brick should be insulated as close as possibly to the balance of the forge walls IMHO). As far as I'm concerned, a good door design will improve forge performance better than putting additional bricks inside to reduce volume. Unfortunately making an effective and efficient door is one of the most difficult parts of forge design.
  6. Graphite forge

    Interesting, I used to machine "scrap" graphite for custom glass molds that I got from a facility that made special assemblies for potting electrical devices. They tossed a lot of end cuts and used to allow me full access to their junkyard. As I recall the material was quite easy to machine with just a wood bandsaw, file, belt sander... but I have no idea whether I was eating up the teeth or not (never had to replace the saw blade, but wasn't in any kind of production anyway. Boy the dust sure got everywhere though. I ended up working in a dedicated storage room with exhaust fan and still struggled with it. Even using a full respirator with HEPA filter cartridges I found traces of black dust inside the respirator and my nasal passages. Not to mention that the dust on the floor was a good contender for slickness with black ice... Don't miss that even a little bit. If I recall the binder for the graphite I used would break down fairly quickly on direct contact with molten hot glass (figure in the 1900 to 2100 deg. F range), but was fine with short contact with glass at working temperatures (probably the 1400 - 1800 degree range). Not sure how this will equate to use as a coal forge, but personally I would go with steel plate as a preference. Note that thick sections of graphite will also transfer heat from forge interior to exterior pretty quickly as well, so your pot design may not be all that efficient. Here is a shot of some of the glass tumblers I used to make with the custom molds:
  7. Tomahawk story board

    John, I agree that there is a curvature difference between 2 and 3, but since it goes back to a flat top on 4 I don't necessarily see the logical progression. Of course storyboards must leave out some steps, or they would be huge, but I'm suggesting that currently the sequence between 2, 3 and 4 is not completely clear.
  8. Tomahawk story board

    Having a bit of trouble (no pun intended) determining the difference, or even the purpose, between steps 2, 3 and 4 (if taken from the top as #1). I've only made a handful of hawks, but some I have thinned down the cheeks (as is sometimes done for a folded axe), but I don't see any evidence of that here. Is the difference between the three just that step 4 has well planished surfaces? If so you might consider leaving step 2 a bit rougher to more clearly show the crosspeen marks in drawing the head wider.
  9. Midway Spiral Gear Blower

    Definitely hear more grinding than mine, and I haven't even cleaned and lubed it yet. I would certainly check the fan.
  10. Midway Spiral Gear Blower

    Well, I'll be following this as I just got a similar blower (though I paid almost 5 times as much I still think I got a deal, so you surely did). Mine has a Champion blower casing and a Midway Spiral Gear gearbox. Perhaps it was cobbled together by someone else, but it still seems to turn OK and blow air, so all to the good. I don't think I'll be going for disassembly, like you are, but just cleaning out the gearbox and refilling with oil. I'll also need to rig up some kind of stand and decide whether to mount directly on the coal forge or make an independent stand. Thanks for posting the photos, those will certainly help.
  11. Student with Project Dilemma

    In your shoes I would contact James Austin (in California) who is not only very knowledgeable about the smithing weapons and tools from the period that you are interested in, but also has great videos of the process and teaches classes: http://forgedaxes.com/
  12. Naturally Aspirated Ribbon Burner. Photo heavy.

    I believe that the reason you can't do a simple proportion for the relative areas is that boundary layer effects come into play. Think about it this way: assume for a given crossection flow velocity there is a layer adjacent to the pipe/duct walls where the fluid flow is essentially stagnant due to friction with the wall. This layer may be quite thin, but it has an influence on the rest of the flow in the duct as well, making the velocity non-uniform in the pipe (see below). Needless to say, this is different depending on whether the flow's Reynolds number indicates flow is turbulent or laminar, as seen below, but that is another issue and I'm not going to divert that far. Bottom line is that if you change the pipe crossection from one relatively large pipe to many rather small pipes the boundary layer has more effect on the available flow crossection area of the latter much more than the former. If you cross over from turbulent to laminar flow (by slowing the velocity down a lot) there is a vastly greater effect, but I believe that will be unlikely for the fuel mixture flows we experience (but I don't have time to do the math now to figure that for sure).
  13. Mixed metaphors, or just misused

    This one went the rounds of my dorm back in the day (I believe that there was a lot of alcohol involved in the genesis): If I had all the sticks in the world I couldn't shake them at it.
  14. First Gas Forge (UFO build)

    Oh, I don't know. Gas jet dynamics, fluid inducers, combustion mixtures, flame front velocity... Sure sounds like rocket science to me
  15. Naturally Aspirated Ribbon Burner. Photo heavy.

    I completely agree with this. As Jennifer indicated the dynamics of each system are rather different, and an NA burner needs some very precise geometry to work properly as an inducer. If you add a blower either upstream or downstream of the NA inducer it will disrupt this induction and more likely than not ruin both that operation and at best greatly reduce the air being supplied by the blower as well. In fact, if the blower is connected downstream of the gas nozzle and there are two openings for the burner (one where the burner outlet is and one, or more, where the NA inlet is) there is nothing to keep the air gas mixture from exiting the assembly from both openings, which you really don't want. The other potential issue with your location of blower is that if you turn it on after the NA burner gets going, and it isn't spark proof, you may have an air gas mixture inside the blower itself and have ignition there as well. Honestly this is a really bad idea for a design and I would strongly recommend you don't experiment with it at all! If you have to add additional air to a NA burner, and you can't correctly modify the existing geometry by relocating the gas orifice, changing it's size, or adjusting the air inlet openings, I would suggest that you experiment with introducing some small amount of forced air into the same air opening as the NA burner uses. This will work better with a design that has only a single air inlet port like the Ron Reil burner. What you are proposing is nothing like Mikey's vortex burner design, which as far as I am aware is just a blown burner that uses a pancake style inline fan instead of a centrifugal blower (not to take away from his accomplishment, as there are subtleties in efficiency that he is introducing with this configuration). As I read it, his design just has one opening for the forced air to enter, a port for the gas, and a burner outlet for the combined mixture.