Peat Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 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? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 Welcome aboard Pete, glad to have you. Do you have hands on experience using Pine ridge burners, other types and an evaluation so we can compare opinions? There are already several members who have experience and have rendered their opinions What pertinent information have you posted we can't learn from reading the PR site? I believe a much more comprehensive bank of information is already archived for posterity on the PR site. Isn't it? Frosty The Lucky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irondragon Forge ClayWorks Posted March 29, 2021 Share Posted March 29, 2021 I would ask Pine Ridge for that dimension. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peat Posted March 29, 2021 Author Share Posted March 29, 2021 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? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted March 29, 2021 Share Posted March 29, 2021 You don't think the welded steel plate across the plenum with the metering tubes isn't a baffle? That's what it's called and the author says it's the reason the system needs such high static pressure. He also says it's a designed feature to ensure even distribution to all the outlets. I did find good drawings, almost blue print quality though the design being the antithesis of my reason for looking I didn't keep links. It'd be like Henry Ford keeping designs for ox harnesses in the office. So, no I didn't spend much time looking at or reading about PR burners they are exactly what I developed NARB to show was unnecessary. NARB indeed shows there is no need for high pressure to make a stable burner. Had I wished to keep tinkering, making even distribution to all outlets is just a detail. A detail I don't have to think up or develop, there are a number that should be easily adaptable. The easiest would be a larger plenum with a shelf across from the inlet. If you're intent on using a high pressure gun I won't waste your time talking about why high pressure isn't necessary for good results. Frosty The Lucky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peat Posted March 30, 2021 Author Share Posted March 30, 2021 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted March 30, 2021 Share Posted March 30, 2021 I'm not trying to sway you one way or the other, I just didn't do a very good job of explaining why bringing my name and NARB up in a discussion about PR burners isn't applicable. Again, the plate and metering tubes in the PR burner are doing EXACTLY what baffles in MOBs are there for. (Multiple Orifi Burners) If you look at John Emerling's ribbon burner plans as seen on Wayne Coe's site or published by ABANA, note the disk of steel with the holes in it welded over the fuel/air inlet. It is there to distribute the flow evenly across the plenum side of the orifi. Both baffled burners REQUIRE a high static pressure blower to operate. There are a number of guys who've made NARBs with 1/2" inducers. What I really like are the ones using smaller orifi. They have much shorter slower flames for longer hang time in the chamber to transfer energy to the forge liner. Frosty The Lucky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peat Posted March 30, 2021 Author Share Posted March 30, 2021 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? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzzkill Posted March 30, 2021 Share Posted March 30, 2021 Yes they will. I'm using an upward facing NARB fed by a 1/2" Frosty T design. It's installed in a flat floor with a curved shell overhead (D-shaped forge). There's plenty of swirl. It's only visible when the forge is fairly cold of course, but I get even heating in the forge and am able to forge weld high carbon steel no problem. I haven't tried mild steel in the forge, but I'm pretty sure I could do that as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peat Posted March 30, 2021 Author Share Posted March 30, 2021 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? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzzkill Posted March 30, 2021 Share Posted March 30, 2021 I did modify the design a little. I used a .023 mig tip, but initially I couldn't induce enough air to get close to neutral flames. I ended up using a 1" by 3/4" T with the .023 mig tip and a schedule 80 3/4" pipe nipple between the T and the plenum. The inside diameter of 3/4" schedule 80 is between the ID of standard (schedule 40) 1/2" pipe and standard 3/4" pipe. For the burner face I used a piece of insulating firebrick (2300 degrees F rating) and drilled a lot of 1/8" holes in it using a piece of welding rod. Unfortunately I don't remember how many holes I drilled, and of course I failed to write that down. I used a piece of a computer case venting for a template to help me with hole placement. Those bricks are rather fragile, and I failed on my first attempt before I got it set in the plenum. I managed to partially melt the first IFB burner head I successfully installed. I am still using the second one I installed, but it is starting to show some signs of degradation. I now have to use higher pressure than I did originally to keep it from burning back in the plenum after a half hour or so of use. That's not a problem when I'm forge welding, but I do end up running hotter than needed for general forging. I can't turn it down enough for tempering. There's no problem using it to prepare for quenching though. Hope that helps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peat Posted March 31, 2021 Author Share Posted March 31, 2021 That's good intel on the component sizing and output, Thank you. Thank you both for your input. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 20 hours ago, Buzzkill said: The inside diameter of 3/4" schedule 80 is between the ID of standard (schedule 40) 1/2" pipe and standard 3/4" pipe. So, you're using what amounts to an oversized 1/2" T burner. No? Why the schd 80, was it just what you had at hand or did you have another reason? Frosty The Lucky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzzkill Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 Yes, it's basically an oversized 1/2" T burner. I started off attaching the same single port 1/2" T burner I had used previously to the plenum. However, once I attached it to the plenum I always had a significantly rich burn no matter how short I trimmed the mig tip. The standard 3/4" T setup with a .023 mig tip gave me a lean burn, so I bought a 3/4" schedule 80 pipe nipple and that seemed to give me what I was looking for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 That sounds about right. I can't say about tuning for smaller orifices in the burner block, I stopped tinkering when NARB worked so well as they are now. Mine made tuning really easy, just getting close seemed to make nearly perfect flames in the forge. I like a SLIGHTLY reducing flame though. Mine are stable stop to stop in my regulator, running them under 4psi tends to allow the burner block to overheat, this particular "design" needs the flow to stay below the ignition temp of the mix. I don't do anything special to my inducers, I interchange them at will with my other forge. The other surprise benefit I discovered with NARB is how much less sensitive the T inducers are to breezes, heck wind or back pressure in the forge. I can close the NARB forge off almost completely. It goes out before the flames degrade significantly. The increased temp of the forge tends to cause the burner blocks to overheat pretty quickly though. Frosty The Lucky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.Rotblatt Posted April 10, 2021 Share Posted April 10, 2021 On 3/29/2021 at 7:26 PM, Peat said: 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. Just my 2 cents. I'm using a NARB with 123 holes 1/8" in a small 225 cu inch forge. The burner is pointed straight down from the top about 6" from the floor. Burner is powered by a 3/4" NA burner of my own design, but I've used a Reil burner on it as well. I forge weld 4 lb billets in it running at 12-15 lbs with a .032 jet. It's no problem tuning, with the reil burner it just works fine. Look at page 21 of this thread for a video of my first experiments that worked. DanR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted April 10, 2021 Share Posted April 10, 2021 Good to see you posting again Dan. How're things for you and yours in these trying times? Frosty The Lucky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.