Mikey98118 Posted November 29, 2019 Author Share Posted November 29, 2019 Me too, but only in smaller diameter orifice sizes, which need to be shortened anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
671jungle Posted November 29, 2019 Share Posted November 29, 2019 Thank you Gentlemen. No biggie on the wait. I have printer nozzles and Lincoln listed .025 migs. Would you say .034 is the ideal orifice size for the home built 3/4" burner? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey98118 Posted November 29, 2019 Author Share Posted November 29, 2019 Yes and no; it depends entirely on the burner design Clear as mud huh? It isn't a mystery though. I describe a whole class of burner designs as ""high speed," because the amount of heat the generate depends on a very compact high-speed flame; such burners aren't the only or even necessarily the best burner design. Frosty "T" burners have a much slower and softer flame, which also develops high heat. In some applications I consider his burner a better fit then mine; in others not. Which design is better? I have already answered that question for the adult readers. Another Frankenburner choose a different path than either , which looks likely to produce superior flames to either one of our designs; this is right and proper in any kind of sane reality So, to answer your question, the .025" MIG contact tip is the optimum choice in the first class o 3/4" burner, but not in a "T". In the third class of burner, only its designer would know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
671jungle Posted November 29, 2019 Share Posted November 29, 2019 6 minutes ago, Mikey98118 said: .025" MIG contact tip is the optimum choice in the first class o 3/4" burner, but not in a "T". In the third class of burner, only its designer would know. Thank you, this is what i was expecting. Knowing not all pipes have the same ID I would have to get in the ballpark and tinker from there. 20 hours ago, Another FrankenBurner said: I am a fan of the 3D printer nozzles what is the largest burner you have used them in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Another FrankenBurner Posted November 30, 2019 Share Posted November 30, 2019 The short answer: 3/4" burner is the largest mix tube burner I have used 3D printer nozzles. The long answer: Mix tube diameter is not the only factor which determines the orifice diameter. I can list three different burner styles which use 3 different orifice sizes. I am now tinkering with a burner which has a 3/8"(nominal) throat which is happy with a 1.2 mm printer nozzle or the 045 mig tip. Finding the right orifice size requires experimentation if the burner is also an experiment. I purchased a 20 pack assortment of 3D printer nozzles for $6 which allows me to trial and error. My burners tend to like a larger orifice than some designs. Printer nozzles are easily available up to 1.2 mm which is too small for my 3/4" burner. I had to drill one to a larger diameter to work. In a burner which likes a smaller orifice, the 1.2 mm top cap may be good for larger mix tube burners. The mig tips and the printer nozzles can't be compared directly by their orifice size. The difference in channel length changes the output velocity and fuel volume per pressure. Even if you know what size mig tip your burner likes, you still have to experiment to switch over to a printer nozzle. In my burners, it is usually pretty close. The 1/2" burners liked the 030 mig tip at 0.039" actual. They now have the 1 mm printer nozzle at 0.0394" but they heat the forge to a higher temperature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey98118 Posted December 1, 2019 Author Share Posted December 1, 2019 Comparing MIG tips and 3D nozzles in burners is largely to compare apples to oranges, as Another Frakenburner notes, but also the variety of nozzles available for six bucks is a temptation for experimenters; thus ensuring they will be thoroughly explored Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey98118 Posted December 14, 2019 Author Share Posted December 14, 2019 #304 versus #316 stainless steel The two most commonly available stainless steel alloys are #304 and #316. Often you can take your pick between the two in a desired shape and sized part; when you have the choice, #304 parts usually come with polished surfaces, and are a little easier to drill and tap. #316 usually come with a dull finish and is harder to drill and thread then the #304 alloy, but #16 stainless has 2% Molybdenum in it, and #304 doesn’t: that addition makes the alloy a little harder to work with, but greatly increases its resistant to high heat oxidation. The one part in a burner that benefits from molybdenum is the flame retention nozzle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey98118 Posted December 15, 2019 Author Share Posted December 15, 2019 On 11/28/2019 at 6:33 PM, Another FrankenBurner said: I am a fan of the 3D printer nozzles as orifices, over the MIG tips. They are listed in exact size, they are brass, they are inexpensive and they have a shorter channel length which outputs a higher velocity stream per fuel pressure. I am curious what a 3/4 Mikey would do with a 0.8 to 1 mm printer nozzle. I would be more interested in these nozzles used in other burners, such as "T" in 3/4" sizes; the reason being that mixture flow speeds of various burner designs vary widely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iceman35 Posted December 22, 2019 Share Posted December 22, 2019 I have decided on a paint can forge should suit my needs for heat treating the blades I intend on making. I’m not going to be welding or forging any blades just heat treating blades from a 2 to 6 inches in length. So I don’t think I will need a hardened forge floor because I’ll just be setting small blades on it or holding or supporting them on a rest. 2 layers of Kaowool insulating blanket all around the inside and back wall with an extra cut to form a flat forge floor. Buttered and “Rigidized” with fumed silica. Then the inside will be coated with either Plistix or Metrikote. That in a nutshell will be the forge hull. I’ll close down the front with a couple of insulated fire bricks if needed. Now my big question is how to get it hot? A Propane torch? Maybe use a 3/8th or a 1/2” “T” burner, “Z” burner? Heck maybe something else? I have a grasp on how to build the burners, but I haven’t a clue on what size orifice to use on burners that size. I have read countless post about burner theory here by the masters and my head is melting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Another FrankenBurner Posted December 22, 2019 Share Posted December 22, 2019 I built a 1/2" Frosty T burner with the 023 mig tip. It worked well. If you are talking about a 1 gallon paint can (6.5d x 7.5h ish), I expect the 1/2" burner would be much more than needed. Especially since you just want to get to heat treat temperatures. A 3/8" burner might be too much. I suspect a propane torch would be plenty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
671jungle Posted December 22, 2019 Share Posted December 22, 2019 1 hour ago, Iceman35 said: paint can forge On page 68 of this thread I have posted instructions on how to build a simple 1/4” burner that will definitely power that size forge. You will need to order edm tubes online. I believe I ordered them on amazon under “drawn brass tubes”. They are cheap and come by the pack. Let me know if I can help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey98118 Posted December 22, 2019 Author Share Posted December 22, 2019 Either building a miniature burner, or else buying an air/propane torch would work fine in such a small forge at such a low temperature range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
671jungle Posted December 22, 2019 Share Posted December 22, 2019 3/4" minimal brazing Mikey ejector experiment. mix tube: 3/4" x 10" (7/8" id) slots cut at about 7" from end. Shorter length will hopefully soften the flame. Jet: .025 mig tip with threads turned down to be pressed and brazed into 1/4" copper line. Copper line will be measured, cut and pressed into 1/4" male hose barb. (copper line must be cold worked to fit the hose barb.) Once mig tip brazed to copper line has been pressed into hose barb, I spray some clear coat down the inside of threaded area to seal any possible air leaks. If pressed properly there wont be any leaks. Still waiting on the 3/4" x 1/4" bell reducer which will marry the mix tube to the jet. Nozzle: 3/4" x 1 1/2" 316 stainless coupling. If this works, it will be an easy and cheap build. My only concern is with my choice of mix tube length. I figure by shortening the distance from intake to nozzle i could soften and slow down the flame keeping it in the forge longer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey98118 Posted December 23, 2019 Author Share Posted December 23, 2019 No...that is a tube burner, and it may even end up with a thigh speed flame, but you have taken some major liberties with my design Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
671jungle Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 8 hours ago, Mikey98118 said: you have taken some major liberties with my design I hope you don't mind. I like hotrods and high speeds! I started with shorter slots so I could tune to neutral without a choke then add a choke for reducing if needed. What do you think of the shorter mix tube? BTW, I couldn't help but notice the time stamp on your post. Sleep much? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jasent Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 A slow flame keeps more heat in the forge and not racing out the door Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
671jungle Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 1 minute ago, Jasent said: A slow flame keeps more heat in the forge and not racing out the door Yes. However the forge design (D forge with bottom mounted burners) I will be using forces maximum swirl and with added baffle walls it shouldn't be an issue. I'm also hoping the shorter mix tube will slow the flame just a little. Just messin around with designs trying simpler solutions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Another FrankenBurner Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 A shorter mix tube is less resistance. I am not sure about slower, I suspect the opposite, but what I have seen is blunt, bushy flames. If pushed too short, the flame will show under mixing symptoms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
671jungle Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 7 minutes ago, Another FrankenBurner said: but what I have seen is blunt, bushy flames. Thank you! That is what I meant by slower I guess. Less laminar flow and more of an explosion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
671jungle Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 https://physics.weber.edu/schroeder/fluids/ The above link is a fluid dynamics simulator. Pretty cool for those who are interested. Apologies if the link is not allowed. It can be found with a simple google search. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey98118 Posted December 23, 2019 Author Share Posted December 23, 2019 6 hours ago, 671jungle said: I hope you don't mind. I like hotrods and high speeds! I started with shorter slots so I could tune to neutral without a choke then add a choke for reducing if needed. What do you think of the shorter mix tube? BTW, I couldn't help but notice the time stamp on your post. Sleep much? Don't mind at all; just keeping the record straight. Furthermore, if you end up improving the design, than more power to you Shorter,/wider slots will strengthen the burner's performance; this design was brand new when I wrote the book, and I went far out of my way to ensure the burner's stability, outside of a forge or furnace. You can afford to "sail closer to the wind" with a tool that you control the use of. As to mixing tube length, you are changing the flow dynamics in your burner, so what the best length is, will change too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey98118 Posted December 24, 2019 Author Share Posted December 24, 2019 12 hours ago, 671jungle said: but what I have seen is blunt, bushy flames. Yes, and they are faster flames too, while longer mixing tubes will flow slow speed, resulting in smoother more laminar flames. Aside from this, Frosty and I want back and forth for a couple of hears about slower flames giving more hang time, versus faster flames t-e-n-d-i-n-g to be hotter; bottom line is that swirling the burner flame within the forge makes a great compromise to the problem in circular shaped forges, and multiple flame nozzles are the better way around the problem in box forges. Often the write answer isn't to pick out the fastest dog on the track, but to build a faster track for the whole pack to run on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey98118 Posted December 25, 2019 Author Share Posted December 25, 2019 Merry Christmas to all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Another FrankenBurner Posted December 25, 2019 Share Posted December 25, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey98118 Posted December 25, 2019 Author Share Posted December 25, 2019 I like it. Ho, ho, ho(s) away... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now