(This is repeat of a contribution I made to an ongoing discussion over on Don Fogg's Bladesmith Forum...)
What appears under consideration here are thick walled furnaces, with an eye to increasing the durability of the structure.
I have worked a lot with various cobb mixes - blends of
clay / sand / organics. Our (
DARC) basic design here has been primarily chopped
straw plus clay. I have built a lot of furnaces, as our primary
investigations have been with various archaeological models.
From conversations with
Lee Sauder, my understanding (??) is that the addition
of sand to the clay increases the resistance to temperature of the
finial wall material. Most importantly, the sand does not expand with
heating near as much as the clay will, thus making the walls more stable
at smelting temperatures. Careful drying of the constructed furnace is
critical.
(A reminder to new readers - as water heats it expands as steam -
something like 50 times the volume. If this steam does not vent slowly,
cracking, even explosive spalling, is the result.)
Straw cobb works in a different manner. Our most typical mix starts with
50 % dry potters clay / 50% straw by volume. Add maybe an additional 10
- 15 % sand to stiffen the mix. The straw is chopped to roughly 10 cm
(4 inch) or less pieces.
The individual pieces of straw in the mix carry out several functions:
- Being hollow, they give the steam someplace to expand into, reducing cracking effects.
- As the inner surfaces of the furnace reach smelting temperatures, the
straw burns out. This leaves hollows in the clay matrix - in effect
acting as an insulating layer. This actually does increase the overall
resistance of the wall to high temperature.
- The outer layers of the furnace, although hot, are not high enough to
burn away the straw. So the straw acts like pieces of rebar in concrete.
Even if cracks will develop, the straw binds the gaps - holding the
walls together.
Generally I would say that the high sand furnaces Lee builds (
PDF) are more
durable over the long term use. I think he had one furnace that ran over
35 individual smelts. The down side is that the construction requires
considerable care and time to undertake correctly.
The use of the clay / straw cobb allows for much quicker construction. I
have certainly done a build in the morning, then fired in the
afternoon. I would generally say these furnaces are not as durable. The
most we have used one furnace has been five smelts. This is more because
of our climate in Central Ontario, working in an exposed smelting area.
Clay cobb is much more susceptable to damage through the freeze / thaw
cycle (mainly because of those internal voids). (Our normal pattern here
is three smelts a year, June / October / November, so almost every
furnace sees at least one winter cycle.)
Something
Michael Nissen (from Ribe in Denmark) showed me when I visited
with him in 2008 - the use of shredded horse manure as the organic mix.
This results in a much finer texture to the cobb. It does still retain
the heat resistance and strength of the straw mixes. Gather old horse
pucks, which shred easily when rubbed between your hands. Mix 50 / 50
with the powered clay. I have not used this for a complete full sized
furnace. It has become my standard mix for the smaller Aristotle
re-melting furnaces, where it shows great refractory ability. Michael
(at that point) was using a 'bellows plate and blow hole' system. This
features a roughly 15 x 20 cm thin plate set into the front of the
furnace - with a hole in it through which the air is blown. This is
hottest part of the furnace wall, yet even 1 cm thick plates of horse
cobb have demonstrated great durability.
I have constructed a couple of furnaces in metal shells.
One was a variation on our 'Econo Norse' brick teaching furnace. I
managed to scrounge a 1/2 sized metal barrel (20 gallon) from the dump.
This was used as an external shell for an arrangement of standard fire
brick set in a hexagon pattern, three bricks tall. The gaps in the
pattern were held in place with a mix of clay and sand - as much as a
binder as anything else. Although heavy, the size is such I can lift the
completed furnace by myself. The solid metal shell allows this furnace
to be portable. The ideal way to use it is in combination with a
concrete block plinth, packed with ash / charcoal fines (learned from
Lee & Skip). See the smelt report :
http://www.warehamfo...eport04-08.html
Last spring, I built a variation on Lee's successful design. This was
his suggested mix of 50 clay / 50 sand. I had an old metal garbage can,
which proved just the exact size required with the bottom cut out and
turned upside down. At this point this furnace has only been fired once -
but it remained in almost perfect condition after the smelt. You'll see
in the image below it also uses a forged copper tuyere - again
prototyped by Lee.
I thought I had a close up of the shrinking of the clay walls. Although I
used the metal can as an exterior form, buy the time the furnace was
completely dried with an internal fire, there was about 1 cm shrinking
all around. Thats with an internal diameter of 25 cm and wall thickness
of 5 cm. My mix was 'looser' than what Lee uses, so much of that volume
might have been the extra water (??). This furnace is set on a circular
brick base (again stolen from Lee). The intent is not to make the
furnace portable, but to protect the walls from the effects of rain and
more importantly Canadian winters (!). I have covered the entire thing
with a old plastic 45 gallon drum for the season. See :
http://warehamforgeb...tion-smelt.html
Darrell
PS - sorry about the order of the images - I pretty much pulled them down as I thought of it.
1) Three older furnaces, set out as an experiment in aging / weathering.
The two at the rear are both clay /straw cobb construction.
2) My new Sauder style 'production' furnace, before firing.
3) Michael Nissen's furnace at the Heltborg Symposium, 2008. Body of straight dug clay, inset horse manure cobb bellows plate.
4) The 'Econo Norse in a Can' furnace - before firing