Mikey98118

Burners 101

Recommended Posts

When it comes to the orifice, right now I have an 035 in there and was thinking of trying a smaller one then working my way back up just to see. Are you saying that a smaller jet might not work as well? I know I had trouble lighting it with the smaller jets at this mixing tube length. I do have tip drills/files as long as I keep my notes on what made this work so far there's really no harm in trying another combo I guess.

Now that I see the flame parts identified I should be able to start understanding how to read a flame.i still have to get it in a forge to know for sure

5 hours ago, Mikey98118 said:

sucked into the forge between the burner body and burner opening).

 Sorry but is this reffing to air passing between the nozzle and the insulation where the burner enters the forge? I may have missed something as I thought that should be stuffed with some scrap wool.

There are so many individual variables, i have kept myself up at night running through these while trying to design this forge. I guess I'll know more once I get this in the forge and see how it reacts. Thanks for the extra help, I'm getting there slowly but surely. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, BlueGoat said:

I do want to see if I can get similar results using a 030

Orifice diameter has a sweet spot just like mix tube length and nozzle overhang.  It's all about balance.  Based on your pictures and description, I think you have found a nice balance.  I suspect a smaller jet will result in a very lean flame.  Maybe a flame that will not stay lit.  The only reason I see for going to a smaller jet is if you can not induce enough air.  

Edit: you just posted as I posted.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok that's good to know, I'll make sure not to lose the settings I have currently. I'll tinker with it a bit just to see since I have the parts already. I'm thinking my forge will allow room to swirl the flame I have but you got my thinking about a slower fatter flame when we were talking about the mixing tubes. I'm heading to the shop in 10 to go play mad scientist a little more and see what happens. Then it's on to finishing up the forge so I can really test this sucker. 

(Jynx)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tinker away.  That's good stuff.  Great way to learn.

As to the shorter flame, you probably won't see much difference between 8" and 6.5" mix tube lengths in that regard.  You may see your flame go darker blue.  

I have no doubts about your forge getting hot enough if it is insulated well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BlueGoat said:

 Sorry but is this reffing to air passing between the nozzle and the insulation where the burner enters the forge? I may have missed something as I thought that should be stuffed with some scrap wool. 

Some burners require some secondary air for complete combustion, some don't. The only way to tell is to try it both ways. The Gaco kiln burner we used is happy with a lot of secondary air, without it the forge runs rich.

100_1775.thumb.JPG.c343846551e967c4ae52300ba74fa8bf.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, I will watch for that as I put things together then

I tried 7.5, 7, 6.5, 6 mixing tubes with both 0.030 and 0.035. I either ran rich with the 030 (believe it or not) and lean with 035. It seems my original set up is burning the best thought the range. Without drilling the 030 bigger. 023 wouldn't even light. 

Time to get the forge finished then adjust it in there too if needed. 

 

Thanks for the help so far guys. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, BlueGoat said:

Sorry but is this reffing to air passing between the nozzle and the insulation where the burner enters the forge? I may have missed something as I thought that should be stuffed with some scrap wool.

The whole point of stuffing ceramic fiber in the gap between the burner and port tube, is to LIMIT (not necessarily stop) secondary air induction into the forge. Just as the gas jet can induce air into the burner, the flame can induce secondary air into the forge. You want to limit that air to what is needed, and no more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BlueGoat said:

I either ran rich with the 030 (believe it or not) and lean with 035.

Did you take any pics of this? That is so backwards of what should be happening I have to wonder if you're seeing what you think you're seeing.

Forget about the 3 zone burner flame. That's a legacy description I wish would go away. Back when the internet went public and I discovered there were other metal heads out there I was tinkering trying to get a burner to work properly. I based a lot of my tinkering, tweaking and tuning on how an oxy acetylene flame is supposed to look. I managed to get the early T burners to produce a 3 combustion zone flame AND work well. 

However an air propane flame shouldn't have the same burn zones as an oxy fuel flame. All that rambled and the point is. Do NOT worry about or try to get a 3 burn zone flame. Your's looks pretty good as it is.

Shorter mixing tube makes faster bushier flame, longer makes slower longer flame. Lots of folk make the mistake and make 3/4" tube 8" long, it's within the generous tolerances this type burner allows us. ;) But be prepared to shorten it some once it's inside a forge, the back pressure WILL effect it but maybe not enough to need tweaking.

Frosty The Lucky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hyper focused on trying to get those two "zones" to kinda blur as I was tinkering. I wrote notes but didn't lable the pictures while I was testing shorter tubes, doh. 

I did notice like you say the shorter bushier flames but I had to move the choke quite a bit throughout the psi range to keep the flame looking decent. 

I have the notes regarding the different length mixing tubes and nozzle over hang. So when I get it in the forge I'll have a starting point. 

These two sets of pictures are with the 8" the first set is 035 no choke adjustment the second is 030 with choke almost closed at the beginning and finishing wide open. 

 

Screenshot_20190628-133819_Gallery.jpg

Screenshot_20190628-133835_Gallery.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having to choke it means the 0.030 jet is drawing more air than it needs. The pics are labeled (0.030 x 8 x 1) Aren't these 3/4" tubes or did I miss the change?  I don't understand the 3 digit number either.

I like the first three 0.035 pics.

The 0.030 looks pretty good all around. 

Frosty The Lucky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those numbers are my own reference kinda. 8"mixing tube (3/4") with a 1 7/16" or 1 9/16"over hang of the nozzle. Those seemed to be the magic numbers for stability. I couldn't type it that way when I named my album.

If you think the 030 is best all around I'll grab a couple pics with the different mixing tube lengths tomorrow. I may not be reading it right, it's really hard looking at a flame with my eye, through my phone and trying to match it to pics from here. 

I'd post the videos of the flame but I haven't figured out how yet. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm trying to use these pics as guides but I'll see green with my eye and bright blue on my phone, I'll see a ghostly blue with my eye and a darker blue on the phone etc when I dim the light filter to snap a shot. 

I guess I'm being nit picky but I'm waiting for insulation anyways. 

As for the choke, I'm hoping to get it to run with out it so I don't have to muck around with it unless I want a reducing flame. 

Thanks again Frosty, I'll check in tomorrow. 

Screenshot_20190628-124500_Gallery.jpg

Screenshot_20190628-124449_Gallery.jpg

Screenshot_20190628-110529_Samsung Internet.jpg

Screenshot_20190628-110517_Samsung Internet.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your numbers are reversed to how we use them. What you call number 4 isn't a part of the flame at all; it is the interface between the incoming fuel/air mixture and the flame, as seen through the flame envelope. What you call number 3, and we would label number 1; it is the primary flame envelope, but is in this case it is reducing, which is why there is a short secondary flame, which you and we both label number 2. The final visible flame, which you call number 1, and we label number 3, is a tertiary flame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, BlueGoat said:

I'd post the videos

The best way is to post them to Youtube then post a link, that way folks can click on the link if they want to view the video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the section I grabbed that numbered flame from. 

I'm not saying anyone's wrong but I was thrown off by this as it seemed backwards. 

My main goal despite names and numbers while testing was to try and have the primary and secondary area kinda blur together so I didn't have the bright lightblue and less of that tertiary flame without getting purple. 

Ill take some more pics today with the different mixing tube lengths and lable them better as I'm obviously struggling with reading them. 

https://www.iforgeiron.com/profile/74859-another-frankenburner/

I'm not a huge tube guy. If I upload a video for private only and share it here will it be visable or do I have to upload it for public? 

Iron dragon I'm not a huge youtube guy. If I upload a video for private only and share it here will it be visable or do I have to upload it for public? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My bad on the numbering, I hadn't thought about it.  I was just going left to right on the different sections.  

Since we are on the semantic subject anyway, I do like something Mikey had said which, in my mind, clears up some nomenclature.  The primary flame is the flame whose air is coming from the burner itself, the secondary flame is the flame which gets it's air elsewhere.  This, in my mind, eliminates tertiary flame.  In the cases where it is currently being used, it is because the primary flame has more than one zone.

Words are fun.

I agree with Frosty on not being too nitpicky with all of this if you are just wanting a burner for your forge.  While experimenting, I tend to pay a lot of attention to all of this to determine what is happening with the changes in each iteration.  The truth of the matter, I have used a burner spitting out green flames and it still made metal hot enough to hit.  If you adjust until you just pass the point of not seeing green, your burner is running great.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Relax Bluegoat, your burners will need to be retuned when you put them in the forge anyway, that just IS. 

Trying to use the terminology for flame envelopes/zones, etc. is jumping into murky water. So many people here and everywhere have published on the subject either using incorrect terms or just making them up. If you get hung up on terminology, you'll be forever trying to make sense of nonsense.

I haven't used burn zone/flame envelope terminology for a long time. There are occasional exceptions but I try not to, there is so much misinformation around it just confuses people. 

Relax and tinker till you lie your forge, then we'll get it tuned for use. Till than just play with the fire. ;)

Oh, do you have a name or nickname we can call you? Bluegoat makes me want to call you Agoutti and that's probably  not a fit. 

Frosty The Lucky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blue goat is my old Chevy, my real name is Trevor. I'll update the profile, I always get lost when filling those out. 

Flame names are definitely confusing and I'm more of a visual guy anyways. 

I went through the length combos again and labled the pics. If you could give me an idea of the combo I should start with I'll set it up and leave it alone until the forge is lined. Pics are all 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30 and with this nozzle over hang I didn't need to choke at all. 

All these are 3/4" mixing tubes with the step nozzle at a 1 1/2" over hang. The photos still look a bit different in real life but are closer then my previous pics, I played with the light filter and ISO settings. 

I really appreciate all the advice so far and your patience. 

Screenshot_20190629-110044_Gallery.jpg

Screenshot_20190629-105511_Gallery.jpg

Screenshot_20190629-104351_Gallery.jpg

Screenshot_20190629-104328_Gallery.jpg

Screenshot_20190629-104258_Gallery.jpg

Screenshot_20190629-104755_Gallery.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh, heh, heh, My old 59 Chevy 4x4 pickup was called The Blue Goose. I  miss that old truck but not the headaches keeping it road worthy you had to tune it for summer or winter but it was really reliable. Still, the new ones are pretty trouble free.

They look good to me till you get to the bottom two sets. 7 030 and 7 035. The yellow feathers in the flame says they're too rich. UNLESS the tubes are brand new pipe nipples and they're just burning off the residual oils.

Often sparks, yellow flames, etc. are debris that found it's way into the burner so if it goes away in a LITTLE while ignore it. Early on I dismounted a burner and completely disassembled it looking for the cause of a shower of exploding sparks amidst a forge full of yellow fire. It looked like I was burning news paper. I couldn't find a thing, put it back together and everything was ricky tick.

Then I looked at another burner right by the forge and it was full of momma spider's nest. There was an egg sack about the size of a shooter marble and the tube was solid web. So I  mounted it in the forge and lit it up. Same effect and it cleared up in about 15-20 seconds.

Poor unhatched spiders. <sniff>

Frosty The Lucky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hahaha, no spiders. That was a fresh cut pipe so I assumed the sparks and flicker were metal dust stuck to that little oil skiff inside the tube as they do go away. 

The truck is an 84 frame up with a 76 drive train, still has the hi power orange paint on the block. It's not rebuilt but I have replaced most of the consumable parts she gets me around. 

Well burner's done then except adjustments inside the forge. Body of the forge is getting hi temp paint right now and insulation is getting ordered asap ;-) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We had to send my 86 chev pickup to the crusher year before last, the engine just wasn't worth another rebuild. I hadn't used it for anything but a yard crummy and plowing snow for a few years then one day she just wouldn't turn. I even put a big wrench and cheater on the crank and it wouldn't budge. I pulled the spark plugs and sprayed CRC in each and let it soak. Seized up solid and I don't know why, she'd only been sitting idle a week or so. 

Even as rough as the 86 was the 2011, 1500 4x doesn't hold a candle to it, won't push as much plow, carry the load and worst of all has a wider turn radius than the dump trucks I used to drive. 

Ahhhhh, old trucks, weren't they grand? Uh. . . Nope, I don't remember any problems, not a one. :rolleyes:

Frosty The Lucky.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, BlueGoat said:

Iron dragon I'm not a huge youtube guy. If I upload a video for private only and share it here will it be visable or do I have to upload it for public? 

I don't do anything with youtube but watch occasional videos. The link idea comes from here when I see the link I decide to watch or not. Someone who is more tech savvy than I will probably answer though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's sad news Jerry it's sad when the old girls go. And the new ones are nice but definitely a complety different animal. 

 

Ya, I'm good at watching YouTube just never made one. That's why I just screenshot the albums ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, the Blue Goose was probably more excellent 40 years ago the 86 was pretty worn when I got it but it served while it lasted.

Another reason we prefer a link to Youtube rather than posting videos to the forum is bandwidth. IFI has members in at least 150 countries around the planet and many of the 50,000 members don't have broad band and pay for their connection time. We try to go light on bandwidth on their account.

Frosty The Lucky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.