New guy forge/burner feedback

[VKS]

So first iI'll introduce myself, I'm Vick and I'm a metal fabricator by trade. Always been drawn to the Bladesmith/Blacksmith trade and now I'm finally jumping into it.

 

So here's my forge and burner design. The forge will end up with an interior dimension of  9"x7"x5" once it's insulated (2"kaowool, skinned with about 1/2" castable refractory then coated with some itc-100 with a kiln shelf floor). I roughly built up a 3/4" Mikey burner just to see how/if i can get it work. I also built up a T-burner and a side arm burner for testing. I've read a lot (mostly on this forum) and I was looking for some feedback on the burner flame pattern and if I'm headed in the right direction. My main concern is it getting up to forge weld temps. I know a lot of that is based upon how efficient the forge is but i just want to share my plans and am looking for feedback to see if i'm heading the right direction.

 

The attached burner images are at 5, 10, 15 psi for reference. 

 

[Mikey98118]

Your burner works well enough to use as is; that doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement.

[VKS]

1 hour ago, Mikey98118 said:

Your burner works well enough to use as is; that doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement.

Just the guy I was hoping to chime in! I'm fully open to suggestions and would love to get it to run as efficient as possible. What would you recommend I start with? Just a little more info for reference, it's 3/4" ID tubing, .035" MIG tip threaded into a .25" brass pipe that has been fully tapered (looks kinda like a long bullet now), its has four .35"x3" slots and is a total of 10" long. The end piece is 1" ID stainless tubing that's about an inch off the end of the burner body. I believe I have the end of the MIG tip flush with the end of the slots.

[Binesman]

Mikey is the guy to talk to for burners so i wont say a word there.  The one piece of advice i would give is to go with matrikote as a kiln wash unstead of itc100.

[genesaika]

I really like the shell you made for it, what is it made of?

[Frosty]

Welcome aboard Vick, glad to have you. If you'll put your general location in the header you might be surprised how many of the gang live within visiting distance. 

That forge shell sure looks like it was made by a fabricator, nice job. How about a pic of the entire burner? The flame looks pretty good for burning in open air, once enclosed in the forge back pressure will alter it's performance.

Frosty The Lucky.

[Charcold]

For sure one of the cooler looking forge shells i've ever seen. 

[VKS]

3 hours ago, Binesman said:

Mikey is the guy to talk to for burners so i wont say a word there.  The one piece of advice i would give is to go with matrikote as a kiln wash unstead of itc100.

I'll definitely check it out. Does it perform better than itc? I do see that they don't recommend applying it over castable refractory, whereas ITC guys are using it as their final coat. My plan was to go kaowool, rigidizer, castable, then itc. Is that the correct order?

2 hours ago, genesaika said:

I really like the shell you made for it, what is it made of?

It's all 12g steel that I cnc cut/bent. 

7 minutes ago, Frosty said:

Welcome aboard Vick, glad to have you. If you'll put your general location in the header you might be surprised how many of the gang live within visiting distance. 

That forge shell sure looks like it was made by a fabricator, nice job. How about a pic of the entire burner? The flame looks pretty good for burning in open air, once enclosed in the forge back pressure will alter it's performance.

Frosty The Lucky.

I got it updated. I'll grab some pics of the whole assembly this evening. 

5 minutes ago, Charcold said:

For sure one of the cooler looking forge shells i've ever seen. 

Appreciate it!

[Mikey98118]

15 hours ago, VKS said:

Just the guy I was hoping to chime in! I'm fully open to suggestions and would love to get it to run as efficient as possible. What would you recommend I start with? Just a little more info for reference, it's 3/4" ID tubing, .035" MIG tip threaded into a .25" brass pipe that has been fully tapered (looks kinda like a long bullet now), its has four .35"x3" slots and is a total of 10" long. The end piece is 1" ID stainless tubing that's about an inch off the end of the burner body. I believe I have the end of the MIG tip flush with the end of the slots.

We will get to that, but first I gotta say you did a slick job on your forge shell and table; I love to see smart metalwork work.

As to the burner; it's not easy to be sure about its construction in a flame picture. However, the flame itself tells me that you are very close. One of the things that causes a lot of confusion is proper size of MIG contact tips; they don't just change in accordance with burner tube diameters; they also change to some degree by mixture flow. Frosty runs a little bit large MIG tips in his burners then I do in mine. A 3/4" Mikey burner is meant to run with a  MIG tip for .030"  wire as a maximum and a tip for .023 welding wire as a minimum. So before we go any further, try checking out your tip options to see if you can make the magic flame the easy way 

[Binesman]

8 hours ago, VKS said:

My plan was to go kaowool, rigidizer, castable, then itc. Is that the correct order?

That is the correct order.  It is also recomended 2 layers of 1" kaowool instead of 1 layer of 2" each ridgidized seperately for grwater safety and ease of repair (not sure wich route you where intending).  As of recent discussions on these forums im going to be switching over to superwool over ceramic fiber for the potential of greater safety( idlf you have not yet purchases your blanket i would recomend looking in to this.  If you have already i dont think its a huge difference as long as you remember ppe and propsr precautions).  To matrikote vs itc.  Regardless of manufacturers statements matrikote can be applied over castable as a kiln wash.  Many of the members of this forum do so.  It does not provide 100% the heat rebound of itc.  I would put it in the 85 to 90% range for reflective comparatively.  However it holds up to flux and direct flame substantialy better along with creating yet another hardface/safety barrier to your blanket.

[Frosty]

Binesman: Where do you get your data for ITC-100 vs Metrikote? ITC 100 wasn't developed for an IR re radiating coating it was developed as a consumable coating to shield furnace components from combustion and material byproducts. For instance it prevents certain glazes and pigments from bonding to kiln shelving. 

ITC is primarily zirconium silicate and kaolin clay and never fires so it will rub off eventually needing re-washing. Metrikote and Plistex are  zirconium silicate in a different, water setting matrix that forms a hard surface that has to be broken off. 

You have the basic order right Vick. Check out Forges 101 thread for detailed discussion of forge builds, pros, cons and some outright silly ideas.

Frosty The Lucky.

[Binesman]

Frosty.

 

Data is coming from observation only running forges side by side and seeing what they could handle.  The pure science of it isnt my thing im a tinkerer not engineer (that is not meant in anyway sarcastic just the best way i can think of describing the scenerio) i apologise when stating percents i can see where it could be thought that it is coming from data sheets when it is comimg from watching the differance of kastolite plain/matrikote coated/itc coated.  Itc seems to heat the quickest by observation while matrikote does not heat as well it does make a significant difference over bare kastolite by obsevation.  Also itc gets beet up much quicker and doesnt hold up to flux realy at all by observation.  While matrikote i tend to only reaply after im clumsy and whack the wall even with the use of heavy flux.  Reflective may also be the wrong term again not much on the science of it just the practicality of it.  These statements are all obsevations.  Since joining these forums ive built about 3 dozen forges and ran multiple differnt versions side by side to see how i felt they handled. (turns out i think i like making the forges more then hitting the metal) i also have a severe i want it to be perfect complex and since i dont know the science i just slap it together and compare.

 

If your science(again no sarcasim intended i understand you have a far greater knowledge of the material than i do) points to something different than my observations please tell me and why (so i can try to learn some of the science) and i will recompare that aspect to see if my observation is wrong or if it is correct and there is another variable at work.

[Frosty]

I misunderstood,  that's why I asked. I have no problem with observation over written numbers, it's real world data rather than what some guy with a calculator says it should be.

We've observed the same thing and it's misleading. ITC-100 is zirconium in approx 30% kaolin clay matrix. Porcelain has vitrifying temps around  2,160 f. - 2,235 f. and there's a lot of variations depending on what else is in it. It's not just temperature that does it, it takes time and slow cooling to get something that's hard and durable like a coffee cup. (No, don't be impressed, I just spend half an hour searching. Digitalfire. com is a great site but I had to search notations and the biblio to find a simple chart. <sigh>)

Anyway, our forges may get plenty hot enough but we don't leave them running for the number of hours necessary for porcelain to form from kaolin or let it cool slowly enough for the crystal structure to form correctly, it stays chalky.

Being chalky means ITC-100's surface is very fine particles so they heat up almost instantly giving the appearance the wash is hotter and re-radiates more efficiently. It does, true enough there just isn't much thermal mass and it allows heat to conduct more deeply faster than other products. IR re-radiance isn't ITC-100's designed purpose so it isn't a bad product, we just aren't using it for what it's for. Well, except to help protect our liners from HOT flux, that IS what ITC-100 is for.

Products like Metrikote and Plistex use a different binder, IIRC a calcium based water set cement to hold the zirconium silicate. Don't quote me, I just burned out looking for details I recall sort of and don't want to do it again. I could have the calcium wrong.(That alone should dispell any myths about how scientific I am.  Anyway These kiln washes behave like concrete in water starts a chemical process that locks the particles in place. It's different from concrete in they can take high temps without degrading. The high % of zirconium gives it LOW thermal conductivity and high re-radiance, doing what we want a forge liner to do.

The reason Metrikote, etc. work better than straight Kast-O-Lite is conductivity, Kast-O-Lite absorbs more heat more deeply so it begins glowing more slowly. Glow is re-radiated IR.

Kiln washes don't do well in thick coats and tend to flake.

You aren't wrong and even your %s seem accurate considering differences between our eye sight. It just doesn't coralate directly to forge efficiency. I've got THAT T shirt, heck a closet full.

Frosty The Lucky.

[Binesman]

Frosty a question.  I thought itc was meant to reradiate and get the forge hotter faster and keep it that way.  Good to know that is not the purpose of it (although it does seem to do that) you said it is designed to protect against flux.  I have use itc on 3 different forges now and on each of them flux aeems to pretty much destroy the itc.  Not as bad as it will ceramic blanket but not far off.  Am i applying it wrong/over using flux/both? Or is this what you where talking about where we dont get it to its proper vetrification point?  I only ask because honestly feom what ive seen with testing if you want the forgw hot and thats your only concern itc100 is the way to go.  But if you care about anything other then temperature matrikote will get close for temp but has the protection aspect.  (it seems like this is backwards from what your stating as "intended" purpose)