G-son

Members
  • Content Count

    99
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About G-son

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Sweden

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. In theory… If you add extra layers of insulation just to reduce the internal size, those outer layers of insulation should never see the very high internal temperatures, so I'm guessing a cheaper, lower temperature insulation could be used there.
  2. I believe that relates to how the steel was made, not that the actual axe is a casting. In itself it doesn't seem to confirm or deny that the axe is a welded or monosteel item - everybody in history has bragged about the best properties of the items they sell, I have so far not seen anyone try to sell cutting tools saying "we make them with the best steel for the cutting edge and the cheapest stuff we can get away with for the rest". You mention the good stuff, you don't mention the rest... Either way, a simple spark test should give you a good idea if you've got high carbon steel or not. Take it to the grinder and the sparks will let you know.
  3. All right, thanks. It seems that adjustable jet position would be a nice addition to most/all(?) types of burners - but perhaps not always worth the extra work, if you're just going to tune it once and then leave it alone.
  4. Many axes (and other cutting tools) have mainly been made of cheaper low carbon steel, with just a small piece of high carbon steel forge welded in for the cutting edge. You may have an axe that has been used and sharpened so much the edge steel is gone, and what remains will not take a heat treat. A new piece of suitable steel can be forge welded to it in that case, used to be a common repair.
  5. This is a matter of getting the end of the gas jet in the right place in the burner to get the correct air flow, right? A different construction where the gas jet can be moved in/out could be used for the same result, or am I understanding the function wrong?
  6. G-son

    Forges 101

    Was this perhaps supposed to go in the "Burners 101" rather than "Forges 101"? Anyway, as you say, a smaller burner may require more time to build to the required precision, material costs only go down a little (from using smaller/shorter pieces), and you still need to do the same number of machining operations, setting the pieces in the mill/lathe etc. the same number of times as when making a larger burner. As usual the big cost is the time spent, not the materials.
  7. Had to search for the atlas burner to find info, didn't know about it. Appears to be an extremely simple design, and while I like simple things it's rarely the way to go if you want high efficiency. What you save on a simple burner may cost you a lot in gas consumption further down the road.
  8. G-son

    Burners 101

    Would perhaps make more sense to talk about angles than diameter to length ratios.
  9. G-son

    Burners 101

    The same thing goes for oxygen/acetylene welding torches. Turn the flame down too far and reflected heat can overheat the tip, causing backfiring inside it (and getting you sprayed with molten metal in the process).
  10. That looks really good! Promising for a small (hand held) burner using one of the smaller nozzles.
  11. These cooking burners use very thin metal and small holes, seems to work there. But I'd also worry about backfiring when the metal gets hot as it does in a forge. Might need a material that insulates better. or perhaps cooling the metal in one way or another, but removing heat from a forge seems counter productive.
  12. Wasp waist DOES sound good, and mentioning the waist makes it pretty clear they have one. Sometimes being "more technically correct" doesn't help people understand what you mean, quite the opposite when you start using words most people don't use regularly and perhaps don't even know what they mean.
  13. G-son

    Burners 101

    Thankyou. I added the nozzle as some of the commercial wasp waist burners flare out into a short nozzle. Others just end without anything after the cone. Easy enough to remove and see what happens. I should be good on the taper. Good to know a number to aim under, for future versions. The intake cone on many commercial versions seem to often be a smooth radiused bell mouth, starting at a steep angle (often ~90 degrees), progressively going down to basically zero angle at the waist. As I have a "straight" cone, the steeper the angle, the more sudden change of direction at the waist. I wanted to keep the sudden change at the waist relatively small, especially as I have no "rounding off" between the cones = there's a sharp step there (and from what I know of aerodynamics big sharp steps are generally good to avoid). Could get both a steep angle entry and small angle change at the waist by making a multi-stage cone, two or three different angles from the start to the waist, but I think that belongs somewhere later in the testing procedures - when most of the pieces aren't held together with just wire and tape.
  14. G-son

    Burners 101

    Out of the history of all cobbled together xxxx this might be the worst… but as it actually worked as a prototype and can be a useful method for someone else who perhaps want to do it a bit more seriously I'll show it here. I got interested in the wasp waists the last few days, and threw together a very, VERY basic prototype. It's simply two sheet metal cones and a flame retention nozzle. Metal comes from old shaving foam spray cans - costs nothing and is very easy to work with, good enough for a quick n dirty prototype. I didn't bother trying to go for a specific length to diameter ratio anywhere, as my thinking is that I grind the small end off the cones shorter until the waist is large enough to produce a neutral flame - changing the diameter and length at the same time, so it's basically only good for finding the approximate waist diameter to go with the 0.6mm MIG tip I'm borrowing from my previous build (that has a 18mm mixing tube, yellow on the second picture, the prototype waist is 12mm for starters). The entry cone has the same angle as on the linear burner (that's 3x mix tube diameter att the entry and 4x diameter length, but in this case, as I said, I more or less ignored everything but the angle), and the exit cone opens up at 2 degrees from center line, 4 degrees included angle. Testing conditions weren't ideal, couldn't see the flame well outside in daylight so I can't really say much about the waist size vs. tip size now - need to work on that in less light. But so far: It burns most stable with the gas turned up relatively high, and the gas jet needs to be rather far back from the waist, going closer causes fluttering. I held steel wire in the flame and it goes bright orange (same for the 18mm burner), but the hottest zone of the flame is closer to the burner. It's far from a functional burner, but it's interesting that it burns as well as it does with the gas jet out of a burner with 50% larger mixing tube diameter = 2.25 times the size of the opening. My testing is probably shut down for winter soon, but this seems like a concept worth diving deeper into later. And anyone else can make the same kind of cones, thicker sheet metal just requires a round bar to work it around and a mallet to shape it with.
  15. Very excited to see those results! About sizes… 1" burners and 3/4" burners have nothing to do with 1 or 3/4 inches, other than the tubing they're made of is graded by a system that once upon a time had that size, before it was changed to thinner wall thus increasing the internal diameter. I'd say scrap the incorrect grading and call it what it actually is. As it has (at least) two diameters of interest, it would make sense to call it a 0.75/1.00" burner, if those are the actual diameters of the waist and exit. You can even take one step further and grade them in metric, reducing the risk of confusion. Out with the old, in with the new. In the end, the diameters don't really matter. The important thing is how much heat they put out, i.e. how big forge they can handle, if they are to be used in a forge.