Propane forge refactory cement

[New axe maker]

Best place to get a hold of kaowool and refactory cement for a propane forge.

[Frosty]

EJ Bartells for the Kaowool, they're in the phone book. Tell them you're with the Association of Alaskan Blacksmiths and they'll treat you like gold.

What do you want refractory cement for? It isn't an improvement in a propane forge. A rigidizer then a good kiln wash on the other hand is a serious improvement both performance and Health wise.

Refractory cement is something someone in the "more is better?" crowd thought was a good idea but he didn't know much about propane forges when he made his "improvement." A lot of guys use it but it isn't much good.

In short don't waste your money or time on cement. Get with the club and you might get set up with a good kiln wash. Or you can call a ceramics supplier and ask for a kiln wash that will shield the refractory from caustic contact. If you want ITC-100 I believe you'll have to order it outside.

Frosty The Lucky.

[Alan Evans]

4 hours ago, Frosty said:

EJ Bartells for the Kaowool, they're in the phone book. Tell them you're with the Association of Alaskan Blacksmiths and they'll treat you like gold.

What do you want refractory cement for? It isn't an improvement in a propane forge. A rigidizer then a good kiln wash on the other hand is a serious improvement both performance and Health wise.

Refractory cement is something someone in the "more is better?" crowd thought was a good idea but he didn't know much about propane forges when he made his "improvement." A lot of guys use it but it isn't much good.

In short don't waste your money or time on cement. Get with the club and you might get set up with a good kiln wash. Or you can call a ceramics supplier and ask for a kiln wash that will shield the refractory from caustic contact. If you want ITC-100 I believe you'll have to order it outside.

Frosty The Lucky.

I have to disagree with Frosty's sweeping conclusions on pretty well every level. 

My first furnace used ceramic fibre and lasted for a few projects. It was built for forging 1500mm x 50 mm (5'x 2") square aluminium lengths and a  few steel ones after that. It worked okay, but took a long time to heat larger sections and the heat travelled a long way up the handle part as a consequence.

I did not convert to refractory cement lined castable with insulation cast able cladding on a whim or because "more is better".

My first cast able punching furnace was designed for one project to heat 150mm sections of 50 x 20 up to 100mm square (2" x 3/4" up to 4" square) to punch some 1,200 Ø50mm (2") holes. The furnace lasted for 15 years longer than its expected three month life. It was finally broken down and replaced still in working condition because it had cracked a bit too much and worn around the mouths too much for easy sealing and was less efficient. It had quite a few tonnes of steel through it in its life. 

For working heavier than 3/4" square...when you are likely to be using a power hammer or press, I think the faster heating provided by the reservoir of heat of the heavier lining and the robustness withstanding the occasional knock are huge advantages.

The other advantages are things like sound attenuation from the increased mass and when coupled with a fan blown burner they can be sealed around the workpiece which reduces the dragons breath and contains the heat more.

It is not just a fad or fancy. It does depend on what you are working  whether you need the occasional heat of a light bar, or a fast heat of a heavy one.

The disadvantage is that it takes the lining longer to heat initially. A lot of the heat is going into the lining for the first 1/2 hour.  

Alan

[WayneCoeArtistBlacksmith]

Check out the attachments at the Forge Supplies page at www.WayneCoeArtistBlacksmith.com.  You will see there how I like to build a gas forge.  This will give you a good, efficient, long lasting forge.

Let me know if I can help you.

[Mikey98118]

I liked both viewpoints; especially as hot-face coatings are an important subject for me at present. I'm still chewing on the information. And I can almost see Charlotte wondering why I'd feel hesitant on this subject. Well, it ain't so straightforward as running a hard coating over rigidized ceramic blanket after all, because of stabilized zirconium oxide powder, and of zirconium silicate.

It turns out that so called infrared "reflector" coatings are actually high emissivity coatings. The way a product liike ITC-100 actually works is that the zirconium content is highly absorbent of radiant energy, which it then re-radiates it in all directions. With a thin coating (under two millimeters) there is a net gain in heat absorption, along with a net gain in heat radiation, and thus it is used on some exterior crucible surfaces. But, with thicker layers (five millimeters and up) the net effect is re-radiation along with very efficient insulation from heat gain, and so these are used on interior equipment surfaces to boost "reflection" of radiant energy from equipment hot-faces. Confusing isn't it? A very thin coating of zirconium on the outside of a crucible increases heat transfer through its wall, but a thicker coating on equipment walls acts as a highly efficient heat "reflector."

So, why would anyone use something this expensive for heat "reflection" instead of an extra layer of insulation? Partly because elevated radiant energy levels within heating equipment do heating work, and passive insulation does not, and partly because every bit of heat turned back at the surface layer of the hot-face, helps to spare the wall material from exposure to elevated heat levels, which is very important for products like ceramic fiber blanket and board. But the kicker is that the efficiency of insulating products falls off at elevated temperatures, while the efficiency of emissivity coatings increases at higher heat levels.

Zirconium silicate is used as an ingredient in refractories for this very purpose. And so we see that comparatively thin refractory layers that are rich in it can do an almighty lot to increase both the efficiency and the life expectancy of a forge. Whew, them's hard sayins!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

[Frosty]

That makes sense Mike. I knew it wasn't a "black body" reflector as has been said or it'd make near perfect household and clothing temperature control possible.

What you describe about zirconia absorbing then re-radiating is the description of a reverberatory furnace. The liner get's hot and the stock is heated by radiated IR.

I didn't wash my forge with ITC-100 or my home brew high zirconia was for it's reverberatory aspects so much for it's near invulnerability to flux and other high temp chemical degradation.

I've been simply wetting my brick then dipping it in a solution about slip consistency 70% zirconia - 30% binder. My luck with Kaolin clay has been unsatisfactory but I haven't found a high alumina clay with a lower bisck firing temp so it rubs off too easily, heck the flame blows hard enough to blow it off to a degree. I'm hoping the -100 sheaved, water activated 3,000f Greencast 94 will provide a fast cure stone-like matrix for the Zircopax flour.

Wayne: my first reply to your most recent reply was disappeared. Good website. Plistex and Metricote are kiln washes whether you spray or trowel it on. I started using the term "kiln wash" for the simple reason it was the term I ran across the most often when reading about it across the web. I can't honestly say "researching" as I was mostly skimming and developing a "working handle" on the subject.

Now that Mikes thrown a new tidbit in the stew I'll have to do some rethinking.

Alan: My advice about thicker is better not being the best course for forge liners is indeed completely wrong where you're concerned. You are doing industrial scale work and your forges need thicker hard liners than most hobbyists. My old double lined pipe forge took time to come to heat but once hot it'd bring cold 3/4" bar to working temp in a few minutes and take all the abuse beginners could dish out.

Most new guys however are working small, 1/2"sq. is large as many get with 1/4"-3/8" sq most common as good learning stock. This doesn't require the thermal reserve of a very thick liner. In my experience a wash to harden the ceramic blanket and another to provide flux and abrasion resistance is more than enough.

Mike however may have just changed my opinion AND as I say often, it's just my opinion I could be wrong.

Frosty The Lucky.

[New axe maker]

Thank you for all this information. I'm not sure what 90% of it means I'm going to have to do a lot of research. 

 

Merry Christmas 

[Mikey98118]

I did quite a bit of research along these lines for a book about crucibles; one of the three that the hacker destroyed.

So before I forget the facts completely:

(1) Untreated zirconium oxide changes its crystaline structure at about 1600 F as it passes beyond it, and again during cooling below it; this changes its size, crumbling any hard matrix it's part of. stabilized zirconium oxide used to cost twice what the plain oxide does; nowadays, it only costs about one-third more. And there are three different elements used as stabilizing agents.

(2) You want to choose very fine zirconium oxide powder to make emissive coatings with, in order to get its famous heat repelling benefits. Also, really fine powder is colloidal, and so will spreads much better on a hot-face surfaces.

(3) In the nineteen-sixties there were government sponsored tests made of zirconium coatings for heat shielding,  and it was discovered that phosphoric acid was very useful for keeping zirconium particles "glued" to heating surfaces, because the first time its heated it polymerizes, and thereafter is sticky when heated, and vitreous when cold. Phosphoric acid also stays nicely suspended in water...now, I'm not suggesting that you can save tons of money and end up with a better product this way...you all should see that on your own.

(4) Zirconium silicate is a man made material that's becoming ever more popular in castable refractory mixes, and as part of crucible formulas, because it doesn't break down under crystalline change or expose other materials in the matrix to physical stress, and the silica content is a standard binding ingredient in refractory formulas anyway.

"What you describe about zirconia absorbing then re-radiating is the description of a reverberatory furnace. The liner get's hot and the stock is heated by radiated IR."

Yes, but deliberately preserving and employing IR radiation should be a part of all forges and furnaces; this is why I keep harping on the use of exterior baffle plates on heating equipment. People think of heat loss from escaping combustion products through exhaust ports, which cannot be prevented, and fail utterly to see the equally great loss through radiated heat through those same ports, which is easily preventable!!!

[Frosty]

Do you know how phosphoric acid is used to treat zirconia? A link is good. Phosphate bonded and high phosphate refractories are good for forges as it's indifferent to contact with hot caustics like borax. A phosphate or phosphate bonded refractory might accept zirconia readily.

You are sure right about IR from the forge, with the door unblocked it's uncomfortably hot standing within 6' or so of mine. I have a fair stack of insulating bricks and pieces on top of my forge to close the doors up as much as possible. The difference in heating time is significant for sure.

Do you have arrangements of as you say baffles that allow large access and reflect IR back into the forge chamber?

I haven't read a lot about zirconium production but IIRC it's a byproduct of uranium refining and some is mildly radioactive to boot. I don't know about types other than pure, oxide and silicate and even less about the differences. I do recall zirconium silicate being preferred for ceramic knives and the like.

Lots to think about, thanks Mike.

Frosty The Lucky.

[Mikey98118]

Frosty,

Phosphoric acid, isn't used to treat zirconium oxide, but to glue it to heating surfaces. This makes a coating that is susceptible to damage on forge walls, but if you're making your own coating mixtures at home, such damage is also easily repaired. And, if you use zirconia "flour" the coating is far more effective than the commercial product. I would recommend this path to people who have fiber insulated forges, and also for cast refractory forges/furnaces. During my book research I found that separating ITC-100 with water gave a much better result than painting the "mud" on refractory surfaces, and said so. However I made no attempt to find a way around its use completely, until the price rose far into corporate greed range.

It's not suitable for brick pile furnaces though; such a furnace needs a strengthening outer layer for the bricks. Zirconiium silicate is going to work better when mixed with a refractory coating on their hot-face sides. I would also recommend dipping the whole brick in a good tough semi-insulating refractory, such as Kaolite 3000 first, to make a tough surface coating all over the brick, and firing it. A person might decide to do this two or three times to get  optimum results. Afterward, paintiing the hot-face side of the brick only  with a high emissivity coating containing high-alumina refractory cement and zirconium silicate would be ideal...I think. But let all credit go to he or she who tries out the idea.

So, why the hot-face only? zirconium silicate contains a lot of silicate, which just might tend to glue some of those bricks together at elevated temperatures; Kaolite 3000 won't. I know somebody would get pretty irritated, if I helped him glue his whole forge together permanently

Hot glass workers use insulated outer baffles on their furnaces to get maximum benefit,  but I only recommend exterior baffles made of high-alumina kiln shelves (painted on the hot-face with a high emissivity coating) because they are physically tough; they are also easy to shape and easy to mount, giving you the ability to have them raise and lower, and also to slide into a steel channel shaped holder for quick change out to other baffles. I don't think we are likely to find anything more convenient in front of a forge than that.

[Frosty]

Okay, you're talking a phosphate bonded refractory. My experience with a high phosphate refractory is good, VERY good but the company is gone as is the product. The guys I buy refractories from don't carry high phosphate or phosphate bonded refractories and ordering a bag is really spendy. On the other hand if all I need do is add some phosphoric acid to the water I use with the castable then I'm golden, I have a jug already. Cool.

The real problem with fire brick in forge walls, especially insulating fire brick is how susceptible it is to thermal cycling. Typically a ceramics or glass kiln/furnace if fired and left running for days or sometimes longer. Heck the ones that last any significant length of time are never shut off except to reline. Light brick in my forge remain whole maybe half a dozen firings and it doesn't matter if they're dipped in refractory or not.

Yeah, I've tried almost exactly what you're thinking of Mike and thermal cycling kills them just as fast. The contact sides benefit quite a bit even just a quick wash of kaolin as a thin slip preserves the contact surfaces. It resists flame erosion and is very resistant to fluxes. Adding an IR reflector makes it all more efficient.

A proposed experiment is to make a form and rigidize Kaowool into a brick size and shape. Properly washed Kaowool is pretty indifferent to thermal cycling so long as it's not exceeding vitrification temps and the wash is the direct heat shield. Of course it isn't going to last forever but it'll last significantly longer than soft brick. Yes, the treatment works that's what the current lid in my shop forge is made of and it's a good 5-6 years old. The original lid was light brick washed with ITC-100 and I was replacing bricks almost every time it cooled off.

Frosty The Lucky.

[Mikey98118]

Frosty,

We may need to investigate making our own bricks.  After all, insulating fire bricks aren't the only game in town. I will do some further thinking on it.

[Mikey98118]

One of the tricks hobby casters like is to mix refractory cement with Perlite, to make an insulating secondary layer. Perlite isn't good for more than 1900 F, but this doesn't matter once the refractory hardens, for as the Perlite melts down into a vitrified layer at the bottom of each little space in the refractory, it leaves an air pocket behind. This would make an excellent filler for a hollow refractory brick form. It wouldn't insulate as well as the commercial insulating firebricks, but would be much tougher, if painted with a high emissivity coating on the hot-face, it should equal them; it would make a good starting point, anyway.

[WayneCoeArtistBlacksmith]

Rather than try to invent or make your own refractory use the products that have been proven by the companies who have been through the process and manufacture the proven products.  You will be cheaper in the long run and have a better result.. 

I recommend Kast-0-Lite for a castable and either Plistix or Metricote for the IR properties.

Let me know if I can help you.  waynecoe@highland.net.

[Mikey98118]

Wayne,

I agree with using commercial refractory products, whenever possible. What we are discussing is how to employ commercial refractories in order to build a product, which so far we cannot buy, in order to achieve an effect we want; a very different thing. We are also discussing how to make other products that aren't available to hobbyists, but only to OEM clients manufacturing high tech crucibles, etc. I would love to just buy this stuff, and someday that will be possible, but not at present. I have watched as cheapskates have tried to save a few bucks by lining their casting furnaces with home-brewed refractories for years on the casting hobby newsgroups, and laughed as heartily as anyone when they crashed and burned. I've also watched sensible people combine commercial products in unexpected ways quite successfully during those same years. Mixing Perlite with castable refractory in order to create a high temperature insulation, which cannot be purchased, has been done successfully by founders so many times that it has become a standard construction technique. This secondary high temperature insulating layer is then surrounded either with a ceramic fiber  outer insulating layer (the easy way), or Perlite glued together with sodium silicate (water glass); the inexpensive way.

[Latticino]

On ‎12‎/‎8‎/‎2015‎ ‎3‎:‎06‎:‎39‎, Frosty said:

A proposed experiment is to make a form and rigidize Kaowool into a brick size and shape. Properly washed Kaowool is pretty indifferent to thermal cycling so long as it's not exceeding vitrification temps and the wash is the direct heat shield.

I'm sure you are aware that Kaowool, or a similar high temperature glass fiber material, is also available in board form.  It is fairly expensive relative to the blanket, but rather than casting it yourself you might want to look into using that.  Board available up to 2" thickness from this manufacturer: http://www.morganthermalceramics.com/products/refractory-ceramic-fibre-rcf/board-products.  Not as "structural" as brick, though I suppose you could cut out 2" thick rectangular sections and stack them similarly to your brick design.  I'd still coat them with a rigidizer of some sort.

[Mikey98118]

Latticino,

It's a question of how high the temperature exposure is going to be. With hot-faces exposed to temperatures higher than 2800 F, you typically reach 2300 F on a 2" thick refractory layer's outer side (cold-face); too hot for ceramic fiber products, and that is when using Ka-O-lite 3000 a semi-insulating refractory. But the hot-face thickness of some kind of insulation filled brick would be much thinner with correspondingly higher cold-face temperatures, and much lower forge temperatures would turn ceramic fiber products to slag.

This is why hobby casters go for Perlite/ refractory mixtures in their primary insulation layers; because the spongy refractory layer that remains after the Perlite melts down to slag is still capable of insulating a 2" thick layer well enough to protect an outer insulating layer sufficiently for ceramic fiber to last. Not that I'm completely satisfied with this scheme; a refractory sponge isn't going to be all that tough is it? But so far, I've got no better plan. Of course, it should go without saying that the outer layer of fiber would be rigidized, to give it some structural integrity. 

[Latticino]

Completely understand.  I was replying to Frosty on this regarding his custom "fibrous brick" project.  Please note that the rating for the fiber board product is 1400 deg. C, approximately the same as the blanket often used for a low mass forge insulating barrier.  I still strongly recommend an inner protective coating as well as a burner block and/or flame "strike plate" (for the wall opposite the flame) made of materials that will resist the 3,000+ deg. F flame temperature.  I typically use Mizzou for this.

I have posted elsewhere that I am definitely in favor of a multi layer forge lining (Kastolite or equal interior and wrapping of refractory blanket) that you suggested.  I also have used an inner lining of high density refractory at times (inside the Kastolite), but only for equipment that will not thermal cycle often, or rapidly, as the two castables have markedly different thermal expansion ratios and one of the two will inevitably crack during the cycle if it is too rapid.  I always wanted to experiment with putting a layer of blanket in between the two to see how that worked, but haven't had a chance to do so to date.

[Mikey98118]

Latticino,

If you have the time, you should join one of the casting hobby groups, and go through their old posts on the subject of multiple refractory layers.

I agree that the flame impingement area needs greater care than the rest of a forge interior. And, so does the "burner block" that holds the burner, if it is wall mounted, rather than roof or floor mounted.

Moving on, I just discovered that zirconium silicate slowly dissociates above 2800 F; once the silicate and zirconium are no longer locked together, crystalline change in the zirconium will break down the matrix of any refractory it's included in. So, it looks as if we are back to stabilized zirconia powder for tough hot-face coating mixtures.

 

"If you have the time, you should join one of the casting hobby groups, and go through their old posts on the subject of multiple refractory layers." should have read " and go through their old posts on the subject of multiple refractory layers, since you show interest in the subject." For I meant the remark as encouragement; not criticism. 

[Frosty]

Latticino: Yes, I'm aware of ceramic banket's major flaws and limitations, I've been using it for probably 25+ years now. Sometimes not so successfully.

I can wash Kaowool to survive near 3,000f where brick quickly breaks down due to thermal cycling. Ceramic board only has a little better resistance to thermal cycling and is WAY more expensive than changing brick out as it turns to grog.

Recent discussion has convinced me to at least give a thicker wash a try. I'm going to mess with forming blanket in brick dimension and shape as an attempt to develop more physical and thermal shock resistant partition walls in my main shop and the new forge.

Maybe some day when the split 3,000f heavy duty hard fire brick pile under my bench runs out I may give kiln shelf a try as a forge floor. I know I haven't mentioned it recently but the floor in my shop forge is insulated under the deck.

The lid which used to be light fire brick clamped in the lid frame and generated grog as fast as it heated and cooled was changed a long time ago. The lid is now pleated 2,600f 8lb. Kaowool the pleats making a 2.5" thick lid. It was washed with ITC-100 initially and it stood up well for better than a decade. Recently I washed it with a 2:1 mix of Zircopax : sifted Greencast 94 fines and it has not shown signs of pealing or spalling to date.

The flame impact surfaces do indeed need special treatment as worse things than simple HOT are happening there. I have found that positioning the burner(s) so the primary flame does NOT impact refractory surfaces high temp chemical and thermal erosion doesn't occur.

Frosty The Lucky.

[Mikey98118]

Thanks Frosty,

I love it when people get specific about this stuff; that is about the most reassuring thing we can do for people who are seriously considering building heating equipment for the first time, and the only way other "old hands" learn anything new. Wouldn't it be great if we all got together and contributed a bunch of technical terms, then collated them into a gas forge glossary for this site? I can't think of a more valuable aid for newbies trying to research their choices before building...think, for instance of how confusing it is when we write of burner ports, to people who've just managed to wrap their minds around tuyeres:

Accelerator: Term for an elongated gas jet, emphasizing the advantage of exchanging gas pressure for kinetic energy when forming a high speed gas stream.

Bernoulli's Principle:

Burner port: A combination of steel tube on the outside of a forge or furnace, in line with a tunnel through internal refractory inside the equipment, through which a burner is placed, aimed, and sealed.

Cage: An external metal support structure for multiple position furnace/forges.

Ceramic Fiber:

Coating:

Colloidal:

Frame: An external metal support structure for heating equipment with ceramic based shells (ex. cement board)  or loose brick

Rigidizer:

Tuyere (French pronunciation: twee-yur) a tube or tunnel, though which  air is blown into a forge or furnace. 

Shell: A metal  outer surface that contains and supports a refractory interior, and upon which burner ports, legs, latches, hinges, etc can be mounted.

Mounted: Sorry; I just couldn't resist :-)

 

 

[Frosty]

You're on Mike:

I stopped trying to define terms for myself two summers ago when the local VA held a "surplus?!" book sale for the Wasilla library. I picked up "the Kiln Book", materials, specifications & construction. second edition. By Fredrick L. Olsen. Hardbacks were $1.00 but this was on the everything in a bag for $1.00 table!

"the Kiln Book," covers kilns built from adobe bricks and fired with dung up to and including electric kilns with ni chrome elements and everything in between. While it doesn't spec anything using NA burners there is no real difference between gun and NA burners once the fire hits the chamber.

Virtually everything we need to list in a glossary is already in one. ILL the book and see.

The only significant purpose of an "accelerator?" is to make the gas flow in a smooth laminar jet to improve induction be it combustion air or bilge water, regardless of the primary pressure, be it propane, steam or water.

Ports are just openings in the furnace liner to allow access be it flame or exhaust, heck what we call "doors" are ports or "portals." Be specific, there are all manner of "Port."

But I prefer the old English pronunciation of Tuyere, "To air" but the southern Appalachian pronunciation, "Tyree" has a nice ring to it too.

I think trying to define "Frame" as anything but the descriptive term it is, is a bit presumptuous don't you?

What's wrong with, "x - mount? eg. motor mounts or engine mounts. Again a person must specify the type mount.

Cage? I think you're just trying to come up with terms now or are you trying to generate discussion? In particular "Cage" already has too many different meanings, trying to lend it another is just inviting confusion.

Someone invented the "adjective" a long time ago to help streamline the language, eg. Burner Mount or multiple burner mount, etc.

Shell: agreed, mollusks got it right first time.

I think what you're suggesting is to "formalize" what's been happening since the internet went public and (among many other things) the blacksmith's craft began to transfer it's lore from the oral tradition to a formal international language. Well okay it started with Cuneiform in Sumer but . . .

Frosty The Lucky.

 

 

 

[Mikey98118]

Frosty,

Discussion leads to general consent (hopefully), then agreed upon terms can be llisted, generally doing more to ease newbie understanding than confuse it. From your comments, I would expect lots of contributions from you, unless you disagree with the very idea of a glossary. If this were twenty years ago, I wouldn't bother, but all you need to do is see all the "definitions" being made up by manufacturers who write in  terms their competition won't use to realize that, when it comes to "gassers" we are rapidly devolving into sales speak; not  engineering terms. That doesn't hurt me or you, but what about all those novices?

BTW, Olsen's book was my inspiration. How could such a completely different text have inspired me? His book is a classic exactly because it contains zero bullshit; just the opposite of most collage texts; I need to find what's become of my old copy...

[Mikey98118]

Also, I would definitely want "Gasser" included in a glossary. One of the things I've missed in recent decades is the profusion of slang terms that used to make the trades more colorful. When I first went to work at Odd Shipyards (Todd Shipyards Seattle) in 1972 you got harassed if you asked for a tape measure; they liked to call it a "yo-yo"; that was back when they had strong enough springs to do that trick

[Frosty]

I don't know how often discussion leads to consent, but it's a start. I'll have to overcome my natural bashfulness and give it a try.

Some of my points were that you seemed to be trying to redefine words and terms to mean specific things they don't normally. That's just talk for talk's sake.

Again, "gasser" is an adjective NOT a noun and it's been used to describe devices using or operating with a gas. To try to narrow a general adjective into a noun is rather counter productive, especially when there's already a perfectly good term, "gas forge," gas being an adjective in that case as well.

Where ever you go you'll find shop slang, eg. yo yo. but it's pretty meaningless in a real world sense. Any one of the gang that insisted on saying yo-yo would look like an idiot if they tried to enforce such anywhere BUT the shop.

Here's one for you. Anything that's jumping and shaking is to be known as "Floyding" from now on.  That's what we called it when the drill got to jumping when augering hard material. Years ago there was an Alaskan native fellow with learning disabilities name of Floyd who used to stand on corners and bounce from foot to foot and wave at folk passing by. Everybody in Anchorage knew exactly who you meant if you said Say Hi Floyd. We never had to explain what we meant when we referred to the drill as Floyding to folk from Anchorage. While it had meaning it is entirely local and utterly meaningless to outsiders.

This is something we'd have to be very careful of if we compile a glossary of blacksmith terms. We'd really need someone editing who isn't as biased as you or I, I think. Both of us have pretty strong opinions and like to argue out case. Argue in the sense of debate, not fight.

Frosty The Lucky.