Jump to content
I Forge Iron


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Petaluma, CA
  • Interests
    Oh, I like just about anything that has a process...
  1. That's good intel on the component sizing and output, Thank you. Thank you both for your input.
  2. Buzzkill, on one hand, that's great to hear, on the other, now I have to make a more nuanced choice... A couple questions for you: Any modifications from the standard Frosty T? Do you recall your oriface count? And did you go with straws or crayons or gluesticks for the diameter? And finally, can you run it cool enough for heat treating?
  3. Interesting. Would you guess those high hang time burners will produce the swirl I'm going to want in an upward facing ribbon in a 4" diameter forge?
  4. Sounds like you might have a horse in the race after all, Frosty. Your enthusiasm could still sway me, though. I am leaning towards the induced burner because I have a small forge in mind, 130 in^2, and I read a lot of folks here on the forum having trouble tuning their smaller burners. There's lots to like about an NA burner, though... If you can set me on a path towards a 1/2 NARB design that limits those issues, I'm happy to come around. My goal is a 1x6 ribbon with a single row of orifaces (Orifii?) built into the table to give even heat for working and heat treating knives. No welding in this forge... Back to the metering tubes discussion, I believe the metering tubes, being longer than just the thickness of the perforated top plate, offer a greater and more even resistance and therefore a more even distribution of fuel mix... Let's not let the perfect be the enemy of the good, but I'm happy to invest a little extra effort up front in something I hope to use for many years.
  5. Thanks for your prompt thoughts, gents. I've read the opinions here (I've read you saying that you don't have a horse in the race, Frosty, despite a lot of time and good thought invested into NARBs and NAs in general ;p ) -but I'm interested in going with an induced ribbon, and I like the Pine Ridge system of a smaller diameter section of burner tube to even flow instead of a baffle in the plenum. I imagine there is a difference in that metering tube diameter based on the pressure of the fuel/air mixture supplied. And this forum seems like the place to ask about it. And I feel a little shy, IronDragon, about going right to the source -It looks like Tom was active an generous with his knowledge a decade ago, but has been pretty quiet for a while. Is Charlie Correll around on the forum? In any case, If no one here has the info, I'll go that route. And Frosty, I don't find much detailed info on the main PR website -is there an area of it that I'm missing? An archive?
  6. Anyone know the ID on a Pine Ridge style ribbon burner metering tube? I'm interested in the LP size, but we might as well get the GH dimensions down too, for posterity... Also, for posterity and ease for anyone else looking for RB design rules, Tom from PR noted on this site he likes a 13-1 ratio for cooling, a 5/16 hole for every sq in of burner face. Any other pertinent information anybody wants to add?
  • Create New...