|
Recovered bloom - only cold worked to remove clinging slag and gromps |
This is the collected data from breaking apart the large
mass extracted from
Icelandic 6
MATERIAL |
RAW / lbs |
KG |
OTHER |
NOTE |
|
|
|
|
|
complete SLAG MASS |
68 |
30.9 |
|
includes tap arch stones |
loose slag recovered |
|
4.52 |
|
|
large mass in above |
|
|
1.26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
tuyere recovered |
|
|
0.36 |
|
tap arch stone recovered |
12 |
|
5.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
main mass with thin edges removed |
40 |
18.2 |
|
|
loose fragments from above |
13 |
5.9 |
|
|
fine slag / earth fragments |
|
1.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
very dense slag from lower bowl |
|
|
2.7 |
|
larger slag fragments recovered |
|
|
3.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
bloom recovered |
17 |
7.7 |
|
as cold hammered over surface |
gromps |
|
0.68 |
|
magnetically recovered |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
total slag recovered |
|
17.7 |
|
+ 1 cm recovered |
bloom as recovered |
|
7.7 |
|
|
TOTAL SMELT PRODUCTS |
|
25.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL ORE ADDED |
|
30.8 |
|
from smelt sequence |
INPUT TO OUTPUT |
|
- 5.4 |
|
loss of fine materials |
Note - the larger amounts had to be recorded using a bathroom scale, which at best was only accurate to +/- .5 lbs. KG amounts for these larger measurements calculated (/ 2.2). Amounts below 6 kg were measured using a more accurate digital scale, but are rounded off to one decimal to match.
|
Mass as Extracted - Tuyere and Tap Arch Stones attached |
|
|
Thin crust of Slag and Fused Earth - around Tuyere (marked by green line) |
|
Slag Block - Side View (most of stone, Tuyere, slagged earth removed) |
|
Very dense Slag, the solidified 'bowl' from under the bloom. |
Yield = 25%
The bloom weight recorded is a bit elevated when compared to other smelt records. The normal practice is to extract the bloom while white hot - and then strike over the surface. This removes the majority of clinging slag. The cold hammering used in this case did remove the majority of this, but certainly not as effectively as hot working. Normally striking over the bloom surface at a welding heat also compacts some of the lacy 'gromps' over the surface. The cold hammering could not do this effectively, so likely some additional material will be lost when the bloom is finally compressed into a billet.
In general, this experiment, as a full scale test of a proposed Icelandic / Grass sod construction, can be considered a good success.
The major modern intrusion to likely Norse / Viking Age method remains the use of high volume air via the electric blower.
No comments:
Post a Comment