Hi, I'm looking into building a forge and at the moment I find the Atlas burners to be pretty economical. Someone sent me pictures of the 30,000 BTU burner they have, which runs at about ~34-35k according to Charles from Atlas Tool and it seems pretty nice for the price point of $35. There is also another burner on the website that has a centrifugal blower attached to it marketed as a 100k burner, over double the price but still cheaper than the parts I've found to build my own. Unfortunately both don't seem to have a lot of information on them.

 

Would like to know anyone's thoughts on these burners!

If one of these is cheaper than the parts to make a T burner then it's a real gamble it will work at all. Just because some marketer says it's a 30k btu burner doesn't mean anything. 30k per day, hour, minute, second? Without knowing how long it takes to generate 30k btu it's meaningless. 

Look in the Burners 101 section of this site, the T burner plans are easy and inexpensive way to make your own inexpensive and very effective propane burner. You do need some minimal shop tooling and skills though. About what you'll need to build the rest of the forge.

If you need help, give me a shout.

Frosty The Lucky.

Without gainsaying anything Frosty just said, Atlas does have a decent reputation, from what I hear. They’ve been around for a little while too, so they do have an actual track record. 

True John, I'm looking at this from a very different perspective. The square air ports just scream not so good burner to me. Mikey is the one with the explanation and knows a different entry level commercial burner that is good. Maybe he'll chime in, it is a knock off of his design after all. 

Frosty The Lucky.

 

Frosty, I did plan on building a 3/8 - 1/2" T burner originally before stumbling upon the Atlas burners and seeing how economical they are. With that said, I will need to build one at some point since I have plans for a forge specific to armoring. I should have probably posted the question in Burners 101 instead of making a new thread, odd choice by me. 

For a bit of info on my forge design, it's an oval shaped chamber with a volume of about ~85-95 cu in. Some other projects might come up in it but I will mainly be focusing on tongs and 1-2lb hammers. Dimensions are  4" wide, 3.5" tall, 8" depth. Lining will be two pieces of layered 1" thick Kaowool and plenty of Kastolite 50-25. I can make a thread during the construction or just post it all here, not sure yet.

Unfortunately I have 3,000 feet of 1"x0.75" rectangle tube so the overall construction is going to look a bit nefarious. With all that said I'm Interested in what Mikey will have to say about Atlas, looking forward to that.

 

 

 

Oh don't sweat it, it's not like I'm offended or feelings hurt. I sometimes type standard rote replies automatically and I should've asked you some questions first. My bad.

Just because something isn't how I'd do it does NOT make it wrong. 

While a little smaller than I'd make there is nothing wrong with your forge plans though I strongly recommend you rigidize the refractory blanket and not with the expensive rigidizers for sale. The home brew fumed silica in clean fresh water sprayed on wetted refractory blanket, allowed to dry and cured with the burner works a treat and is really inexpensive. Check with a masonry supplier, fumed or colloidal silica powder is used to thicken plaster for moldings and such. 

Frosty The Lucky.

No harm at all Frosty, I do like your burner design and I certainly will build one, or hopefully find someone upgrading from a 1/2" burner so I can avoid spending about $100 to make it, I checked locally and on amazon for the stuff but maybe not hard enough. 

The rigidizing part is actually something I had a couple questions for. Some say you can skip the rigidizing process if you plan on putting a thick layer of a refractory over it (Like Kastolite in this instance for me) whilst others say to do it anyways. The same thing goes for rigidizing between each layer of kaowool added which itself seems unnecessary to me.

My plan was to butter the layers a good amount and start slathering 2.5lbs worth of the Kastolite 50-25 into and outside the chamber then slowly cure it with a mix of my blow torch and air drying. The 3D render I sent only shows a thin layer on the inside but I plan on it fully encapsulating the fibers a generous amount. The floor will be a lot thicker and honestly the shape of the forge might end up being a bit more like a D.

 

It doesn't really cost THAT much to buy the handful of parts and tools to make a T burner does it?

While I haven't looked in a while I wouldn't buy one of the kits, as I recall almost nobody selling them had a clue and the plug and play ones weren't much better. All of them have WAY too small a propane jet which means turning the psi up to induce enough air for a stable flame which makes the flame blow through and out of the forge being too fast.

Anyway, when you start shopping for burners how about PMing the link to me and I'll let you know what I think. Okay?

Yeah you can skip rigidizer but there are good reasons not to. Unless you use one of the refractory blankets the human lung can dissolve and safely flush from your body. If like standard Kaowool unless they offer safer, the airborne fibers, especially after being heated to red heat or higher break off, float in your breathable air and any you inhale tend to poke into and stick in your alveoli, forming scar tissue. (the little air sacks that exchange oxygen for CO2 in your lungs) The little insoluble ceramic fibers are there pretty much for good. Get enough of them lodged in your lungs and the scar tissue starts robbing you of oxygen and can cause diseases, think silicosis and mesotheleoma to name a couple.

Once ceramic blanket fibers have reached red or higher heat it vitrifies like pottery glaze so when they break off they have ends like broken glass and they're more rigid. visualize breathing little broken glass rods.

Rigidizing with fumed silica and firing it fuses the fibers together where they touch each other. Buttering is important so the water silica solution doesn't flash dry on contact, it flows along fibers collects at intersections and drying slowly makes a molecular bond with the ceramic fibers when fired. Just like the glaze on a coffee mug. Make sense?

The other benefit of rigidizing the blanket is it provides support to the hard water setting refractory flame face refractory. Kastolite refractories cure concrete hard and inflexible. Imagine a 1/4" layer of concrete on a 1" thick foam pad. What happens if you press down in the center of the concrete?

So those are the reasons to rigidize the blanket, protect your lungs and make your forge last longer. Hmmmm?

It is of course your call, I just don't have enough friends I can afford to lose any if I can do SOMETHING about it. A word of warning may not be much but it's something.

Frosty The Lucky.

Everything you said makes sense and I'm ordering the Fumed Silica, over engineering a forge and safety first above all else. Frosty, I'll gladly take you up on the PM'ing offer for at least the parts (Nice and tidy in a spreadsheet to save our eyes valuable time) of the T-burner when I get around to making one. Of course though I didn't dig super deep into finding the best deals. Truthfully, some of the fittings boggle my mind a bit, I don't normally tinker with adapters and their ilk.

Speaking of PSI, since this is technically a thread for the Atlas Burners, the 30K one is supposed to run at 15-17 PSI in the original Atlas forge chambers according to a youtube short comment or else sputtering can occur. This will most certainly vary in a different chamber size but a good thing to write down for future search engine explorers.

 

Good Morning,

When you get some experience under your belt, you will learn that you adjust the Propane pressure up a bit, when starting a Forge. As the Firebox heats up, the Gas Pressure can be turned down to whatever is best for what you are trying to heat. There is no, 'They said it runs best at........'. There are so many things that can change from one person to another Forge!!

Take notes/records of what changes you make, relate to what actually changes!!  This is the only way you will be able to remember, next Year. Except by leaving it sit, an Insect crawls inside your Burner (or whatever) and you loose your Cool, until you find the Bug/Bee.

Neil

Hi swede, thanks for reminding me about the importance of notes, I should actually start taking some written down rather than just bookmarking a copious amount of links or writing something I learned in a random notepad labeled something incoherent, never to be opened again.

I checked the shop and do not have any of the taps needed for the T Burner, one of the most annoying things is finding out you have a lot of something in varying sizes but the one or two things you actually need you don't have.  Luckily they aren't expensive.

 

 

 

On 10/18/2025 at 11:37 AM, Frosty said:

Mikey is the one with the explanation and knows a different entry level commercial burner that is good.

Well, I did know one entry level burner that was a whole lot more than just good, but they quit marketing their product last year. There was a low priced import that I did say was a good burner...until they changed its design. There was also two US burners at high prices, which both went out of business two years back, leaving only one burner I can recommend on the market, at present; it is quite expensive, and is only available in one-inch size; this is simply too large for anything but commercial forges.

  So, I'm sorry, but buying a Diamondback forge is the only way to acquire even a fair burner at present, which I know about. He has the choice of building a good burner, buying a bad one, or buying a small forge to acquire one that way. Maybe next year the market will improve. Don't hold your breath, though 

Thanks Mike, the single burner Diamondback doesn't look unreasonable online. And certainly easier than building forge and burner if it's in the budget. 

Frosty the Lucky.

Decided on skipping the Atlas burner for now and going for a 1/2" T Burner build, this means my chamber size can be increased to a very nice 6"W x 4"H 8"L oval. If I did the calculation right the 1/2" should easily heat ~158 cu in, maybe even shy of 200 cu in but that might be pushing it. 

I looked into some commercial forges and figured it'd be best just to fabricate my own since I have the time, steel and equipment. The Chile forges look nice but the price tag not so much...

I'll be sure to update once I begin the burner and forge stuff, probably in this thread.

 

On 10/17/2025 at 10:28 PM, Frosty said:

If one of these is cheaper than the parts to make a T burner then it's a real gamble it will work at all.

I didn't want to bother evaluating one of them, but after a quick look, it is obvious that some of my suggestions have gone into their design. So, by obligation, then: They will probably work in a manner most people would approve. The good new is that they can be improved; most burners can't.

Also, I like the fact that they are small burners. The smaller the burner the more worth improving they are. We can always go larger, but smaller is getting harder to find. Especially after Hybrid Burners went out of business.

This is exhausts anything positive I can write about them.

On 10/22/2025 at 5:51 PM, Mikey98118 said:

The good news is that they can be improved; most burners can't.

Do you have an example of improving an atlas burner? I'm digging through the burners thread looking for something similar right now. With that said I completely agree with you on liking them for being small, we need more small burners! 

For my T burner, most of the stuff has arrived just waiting for a couple more things, especially some parts for my old mig welder that stopped working so I can actually fab the body up, which the design changed again to something a bit more resembling a Chile forge. Will be neat to see if it works well.

 

I was writing about the small burner in their photo. We can use it for our discussion, so that others have a visual reference for the conversation. I must admit to an unfair advantage, since it is similar to a Mikey burner. 

  So, to begin with, they have done a good job with the shape of its air openings. I try for totally square corners, but their small rounded inside corners are not going to hurt performance. However, the lack of beveling at the forward and rearward ends of those openings certainly will do so.

  Am I saying that all such openings absolutely must have bevels? No; it depends on the thickness of the burner tube. The thicker that tube, the more substantial the eddy currents creating drag to incoming air that will be become, and the more essential a knife edge, instead of a blunt surface is. 

  On the other hand, Mister Volcano burners made a brilliant decision to take advantage of thinner stainless steel burner tubes, to avoid the necessity for beveling. I purchased one of their burners to see if they "got it right," and they certainly did.

  The second thing is that these burners do not have a flame retention nozzle. To get maximum performance from a high speed tube burner, it is needed. That said, inside a forge, only picky-butts like me would even see the difference.

Finally, I would bet money that this burner only has a drilled hole as a gas accelerator. However, the smaller the burner the hotter its performance (don't ask why, 'cause Mikey don't know). So, what's lacking here probably will make no significant difference; if it does, you can always install a 3D  printer nozzle.

  I'm sorry that I cannot find a first class small burner to suggest for purchase at present. At least their are still reasonably priced improvable burners available.

  Any questions remaining about this or some other burner choice?

Mikey no questions remain, thank you. I included a pic of my sketchy forge design, ~155 cu in. Shamelessly a near copy of a Chile forge. Floor is lower than the "doors" to allow a nice thick kastolite floor not present in the example.

It will certainly change a little bit or even be simpler but I got the steel cut up. Not quite set on the bolted halves for the shell. 

 

I have a couple thoughts. Is there a reason the legs stick that far above the forge body? Keeping the bottom of the forge 2-3" off the bench top is plenty of air flow to prevent burning. To be conservative a piece of concrete backer board or sheet rock between the forge and table with the air gap is a nice margin of overkill. 

Easier still you can cut 2 pieces of rec tubing a little longer than the ID of the forge and weld it crossways near the ends. Longer side vertical to provide air space. 

Visualize placing a bean can on two pencils laying parallel on a surface, one at each end. 

Make sense?

Frosty The Lucky.

 

 

Good Morning,

Maybe that is to support the Second Floor or Forge??     Stacked up like Bird Houses.

What is missing is the support for the end Doors, there needs to be an opening as the Chimney/Vent but there needs to be a restriction to keep the Heat inside the Container The hard part is to think simple not complicated. Maybe there is a Brick or 2 at the front to support the Door pieces. Just thinkin' Not Tellin'.

Neil

11 hours ago, Frosty said:

I have a couple thoughts. Is there a reason the legs stick that far above the forge body? Keeping the bottom of the forge 2-3" off the bench top is plenty of air flow to prevent burning.

I'm glad you pointed this out, my legs were really stupid and kind of a rushed sketch. Your bean can idea is much better. I did mock up a model of the drawing to get a feel for it in a 3D space and think I may have incorporated what you said well? The bottom right image has a concern for me with the door corners at the top basically being flush with the actual chamber, I may round them significantly in the main build.

Orange cube is one inch for representation. Quick note on the brown area too, that's the kastolite floor thickness, not hard firebrick. I used a poor choice of color (The entire chamber will be slathered in the stuff after rigidizing.)

I laughed quite a bit at the stacked forge idea swede, we'll pocket that idea for later. I "think" the designs of the original forges from Chile don't necessarily need doors because of the internal chamber being a bit larger than the entrances creating something of a vacuum/keeping the flame vortex in with minimal dragon breath. I could be completely talking nonsense but I read somewhere that it is a bit dangerous to close off their designs and to keep at least one side open. I have no source for this and I swear it wasn't a fever dream, glad to be proven wrong! 

Worst case I plan on the center rectangle tubes holding the legs having slots in them to fit stock holders, I can make one specifically designed to hold firebrick up. 

 

 

Edited October 26, 2025Oct 26 by Jarunga
extra info

I REALLY wish you'd stop using a rendering program to draw simple pictures, they add zero to designing the device. Stuff like the orange cube instead of dimensions are worse than no dimensions at all.

You're making another basic mistake newcomers to building and trouble shooting things make. You are changing lots of things, HOPING to find one that'll  work. Might as well throw the dice or just use a grab bag. The #1 rule of effective trouble shooting which brainstorming ideas and designs is is. "Change ONE thing at a time, evaluate it and test. Keep notes. Use graph paper and a pencil!

For example, changing from a cylindrical forge to a D shape which increases the requirement for ceramic blanket and only SEEMS like it's easier to build. It also makes my second suggestion for a stand less desirable than 4 short legs.

You've also combined my two suggestions for a stand into one thing I'd never put under a forge. That's up to you though.

You still haven't answered my question from several posts ago about why You've made such a long steel tunnel for the doorway. What purpose do you think that configuration serves?

Your thoughts about somehow arranging the floor below or level with (as in one of your renderings above) can NOT keep the flame in the chamber. It in fact gives the flame an easy path to blow out of it.

Lastly. Being renderings there is no possible way to determine if your burner flame will impinge in a beneficial way. The best anybody out here CAN do is guess. A 2D end view on the other hand would allow me to use a straight edge, say a popsicle stick to track the path of the flame and make meaningful suggestions.

All the issues you've described with closures for the doorways stems from YOU not having a clear image of the parts and how they work together. Another product of trying to design with renderings instead of 3 view drawings.

The architect will happily show the customer renderings of proposals for their new home and ask questions like. Which porch do you like? Which of these front windows do you like, entryway, etc. Once the customer decides on a final design. The builder gets 3 view Blue Prints with detailed prints of important of the circles and annotated sections on the prints.

No professional builds anything from renderings unless it just doesn't matter.

Does this forge working well matter to you?

End rant.

Frosty The Lucky. 

If you're referring to the original first forge design for "Changing lots of things" that is because the 1/2" T burner is far more... powerful than the Atlas one so I had to change it up. A cylindrical forge to a D happened because I didn't see a desirable increase in chamber size using the ~350 cubic inch rule of thumb with an assumption that a really well tuned 1/2" T burner can maybe heat ~150-200 cubic inches reliably, you might have a better idea on that.

If we think of the burners as engines, I don't see it being unreasonable to re-design a vehicle (forge) to fit a much larger engine. The old design would have worked fine surely but it was meant for a very small burner.

I don't see your question relating to the "long steel tunnel for the doorway" ... Did my eyes miss it? To answer, it looks nice, that's really about it. 

For the "somehow arranging the floor below or level with to keep the flames in" thing I probably worded it wrong, I was talking about the chamber walls since the doorway entrances are smaller giving at least 0.5-0.75" of play on each side including the top of the chamber.

The last bit is rather unfair, I'm not a CAD worker or draftsman so I cannot give you good 3 way views. 3D stuff is my medium. If you ask a painter to design something he would probably do it with brushes on a canvas since he is familiar with the process and can "envision" the end result. So with that said I spent a bit of time to draw flat views with some sketchy measurements, maybe it's more appropriate.

I wasn't clear. I meant you were changing too many things at once. Everything in the machine that is a forge effects everything else. If you change one thing you need to make adjustments so the change balances with the rest of the machine. Changing 2 things doesn't double the change factors it squares the number. Increases in effects are geometric, change 3 things and the effects are almost cubed. 

Thank you, The 2 view drawing is much easier to interpret. I appreciate it honestly. 

The problem with the doorway as drawn is with exhaust heat from the forge. The heat WILL warp that large mass of steel and it WILL warp the front of the forge. Front and back if you have two. 

There's nothing wrong with building good looking tools but if you want it to function properly you really have to make sure looks good doesn't inhibit proper operation let alone damage the machine. Your tunnel as WILL damage your forge.

It's common for forges built with bare steel too close to the openings to warp, some badly and badly enough and it becomes a lesson instead of a working tool.

Your stand is still a not very good idea but probably not a tool killer. 

There are easier ways to make a D shaped forge than starting with the shell. The best method I know of is to lay an extra piece of kaowool with feathered edges on the deck and blending it with the sides with hard refractory. Or better if you can find it cheap is to use kiln shelf to bridge the bottom. 

The forge  will have another inch of kaowool or a dead air space under the shelf where the flame impinges. This is more insulation where the most heat is so it can spread out in the forge chamber. 

Having a large porch on a propane forge is a good thing. Simply lay a firebrick on it's side against the opening and stand another on edge so it can be slid sideways to partially close the opening. The "barrier" brick will become incandescent yellow just like the rest of the forge and radiate the IR back into the chamber where it will do work for you. 

What's unfair about stating a plain bit of reality? A 2D drawing conveys information FAR better than a 3D rendering. If you think I have to call you names, put you down or similar to feel better you are sorely mistaken. You do NOT have to be a draftsman mechanical or cad to draw an effective working drawing. I carefully called them sketches and suggested using graph paper as a short cut.

If you feel I'm being unfair I understand and we don't need to continue. You have no idea how much thought, writing and rewriting is involved in trying to explain this stuff to someone with little or no knowledge or experience building stuff like this. 

I'm offering you the benefit of mistakes I've learned in the more than 45 years building these things so you don't have to repeat mine and you can go on to make new mistakes we all can learn from.

Your choice.

Frosty The Lucky.

Frosty is right. What you want to do is keep the steel shell at least one-inch away from the opening's refractory, in order to keep that steel shell from any danger of warping.

As to the stand, I prefer to use legs to ensure air circulation between the forge shell and anything the forge sits on. Those legs can always be trapped on stand or bench surfaces.