Dr. Rusty

That's what I think we were experiencing with our initial designs. Three wings may as well have been obstructions, as soon as the air gets past the directional surface the whole bulk volume is pulled straight in. I haven't had much time but I now try and think of ways to swirl/premix the bulk with propane prior entering the pipe. I had a recent realization. I think a print could be internally porous. Propane could be piped into the walls of a 3d printed funnel, and holes could be made along the surface of the inner portion of the funnel so that you could have many micro leaks of propane into the bulk air for premixing. Now that I have my own printer I need to learn a little cad. I'd also be curious if an array of Tesla valves with a propane link from printed internal pipinh may achieve unidirectional flow with mixing.

I did a quick raid of my photo library and here’s some shots of the modular concept. One video I took a screen grab from, I heard myself saying “this shouldn’t be so easy” when it came to switching out the wing cage. for various reasons we started exploring a different system before things fizzled. With the team split between two neighboring states and doing this in our own time, the process was getting too painful. Someone with more dedication (time) could probably have gotten real successes out of this. I got my printer just this week. If I learn the design software maybe this will get another chance. but seriously, spinning the cage into and out of the housing was my fidget toy at my desk for ages

Last winter I tried to gather a team of 3D printer hobbyists and we tried designing and testing a couple ideas based on the various pictures and discussions AFB et. al. posted over the last 30+ pages. It was a lot of fun being a hobby blacksmith (desk job by day) working with a couple IT folk over virtual meetings, but I didn’t have my own printer at the time and life ate my free time. so after several prototypes, a couple novelties, and much learning, I paused that effort. I also burned off my eyelashes one night with a prototype, and we all have evidence that not having AFB’s designs is more dangerous than having access to them One cool novelty we explored was an interchangeable winged cage/barrel. Was great at fine tuning air intake and felt like a fidget toy. Burner intake was three printed components: threaded lid attached to mug tip assembly, the cage threaded on both sides (one side counter threaded) and a funnel. We could then fine tune individual segments and interchange the variables easily and analyze the results without printing an entire unit each time. I’ll try find the pictures and/or remains.

You have all given me many options to think about. Still processing. I believe it is sharpie. I do not have the skills or knowledge to do stabilization. I want to actively use the hammer. I'm very hesitant to replace the handle. The BLO ideas are great, so too the idea of forcing the signature into the handle of the wood itself. Thank you all!

Hi all. I have a Hofi Hammer that Uri signed on both sides of the handle. Any tips on how I could protect that portion of the handle so that I can still see the signatures without wearing them off or giving myself blisters? So far, it doesn't seem like I hold that part of the handle much, but I'm concerned that basing my hand location on preserving aesthetics won't end well for me; I'm currently receiving PT for tennis elbow and I want to proceed with caution.

Frosty, Mikey, I can never get enough of your input, even if it is burying an idea. You both share so much in return that I win every time. Yet more ideas sparking from what you've both said, but at least now I'm getting better at identifying the limitations and which potential design forks aren't worth the energy. Thanks!

I've been processing the info on here as best as I can, and I've been struck by the concept of keeping the flame in the forge as long as possible so that ALL THE FUEL CAN COMBUST before exiting. Velocity. Volume. Thermodynamics. Aerodynamics. Mixing. Reradition. Flow. Flow path.The brain tries to model it, but inevitably builds itself a universe of unique physics and it's hard to separate reality from fantasy. So I doodled one of these thoughts and I'm curious if there is any merit, or off it has already been tried (and failed). I had a go at the forum search but came up dry. (I'm making some simplifications to hone in on the big concepts, in a similar way to how a physicist might simplify a cow into a ball with udders for the purposes of calculations) So. Regularly, a forge has burners mounted on side walls, top, or bottom. Never facing an open door. From the perspective of the flame, it is thrust into a box that has an open exit hole that is always 90 degrees from its entry point. Pressure in the forge from the burner ultimately turns the bulk flow to at least one direction perpendicular to the entry point. I emphasize bulk, because the local flame flow at any particular position in the forge is influence by various -dynamics. Anyways. Lots of mixing going on for some of the flame, but for other portions, there is quick ejection out the forge door. And I thought, what if the forge exit forced a flow path that was 180 degrees from the point of entry. What if the burning gasses couldn't just hang a left so easily to escape into the environment. What if it needed to do u-turn or hairpin turn to exit? I THINK it would decrease the proportion of flame getting shot right out the door before combusting all the fuel. Increased residence time, Slower velocity, Hotter forge? According to this doodle I found on my phone: would there be value in horizontally front-mounting a burner on the same forge wall as the door? For this theoretical exercise, same forge, burners, psi, etc. Only difference is burner entry point. The metrics being graded/considered are completeness of fuel burn, relative maximum forge temperature, and heating eveness vs hotspot vs convenience. Safety is ALWAYS a concern for all forges I'd love to hear thoughts or opinions. Don't be afraid to tear this down with cold hard facts and logic.

AFB, Mikey, thanks for the feedback. It really helps to be able to think more about these burners when you consider things a little off topic. Especially the kiln shelf idea. I have some, was thinking about drilling out a firebrick, and hadn’t put two and two together. You added value to my day, much appreciated

Is this my first post? Gotta start somewhere. First off, amazing work to everyone on this thread! Took me two weeks to read through all the posts! You are all inspirations. Second, I'm still dying on the inside for any of the 3D burner parts to become accessible in either digital or analog format. I'm sure some posters have been waiting years Lastly, I'm here to post something on topic: the intersection of 3D printing and ribbon burner heads (and even casting). I look at ribbon burner instructions and I'm terrified by the idea of fiddling with straws or crayons or drilling or etc. Etc. Etc. It doesn't quite fit my own process design philosophies. So, I was wondering if it is possible to print the negative space of a ribbon burner as a single, reusable piece to replace all those straws in a block of wood. I can imagine several ways to do it. It may even be possible to print the side walls as well so that you just need to mix, pour, and remove the refractory block in simpler, consistent fashion. If the material needs to be sturdier, you could cast in aluminum? AFB, I think that if you haven't tried it yet, you may like the idea. It sounds amenable to tweaking hole number, diameter, spacing, pattern, depth, etc... You could even shape the holes to add micro flares, ribbing, anything really for your pleasure. I know that was a lot, but this seems to be the right crowd for figuring out the difference between potential and pipe dream. Have a good one, all!