There were 2 heads at the dump, each for 2 cylinders - from a a v4
engine I'd guess. Each of the heads had 1 cylinder badly "burned", as
shown. Anybody know what happened?

Just curious,
Bob

http://home.comcast.net/~bobengelhardt/EngineHead.jpg

On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 16:59:10 -0400, Bob Engelhardt
wrote:

http://home.comcast.net/~bobengelhardt/EngineHead.jpg

I never saw anything like that, but one guess is that somebody was
trying to burn the carbon out of the head with oxygen, like they used
to do with Model A Fords.

--
Ed Huntress

Bob Engelhardt wrote:

There were 2 heads at the dump, each for 2 cylinders - from a a v4
engine I'd guess. Each of the heads had 1 cylinder badly "burned", as
shown. Anybody know what happened?

Looks like a valve broke off and beat the **** out of everything
rattling around inside the cylinder. Looks like they kept it
running as long as the could after it started banging and clanking.








Just curious,
Bob

http://home.comcast.net/~bobengelhardt/EngineHead.jpg

On Mar 19, 3:14*pm, jim "sjedgingN0Sp"@m@mwt,net wrote:
Bob Engelhardt wrote:

There were 2 heads at the dump, each for 2 cylinders - from a a v4
engine I'd guess. *Each of the heads had 1 cylinder badly "burned", as
shown. *Anybody know what happened?

Looks like a valve broke off and beat the **** out of everything
rattling around inside the cylinder. Looks like they kept it
running as long as the could after it started banging and clanking.





Just curious,
Bob

http://home.comcast.net/~bobengelhardt/EngineHead.jpg- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Concur, definitely a busted valve. Saw some like that when picking
over VW heads in a boneyard. Some still had the valve stem stuck in
the guide. One question is why two cylinders would drop valves at the
same time. Or maybe the guy just turned up the radio when the first
one went and only stopped when the thing refused to run with only two
cylinders. What make?

Stan

"jim" "sjedgingN0Sp"@m@mwt,net wrote in message
.. .


Bob Engelhardt wrote:

There were 2 heads at the dump, each for 2 cylinders - from a a v4
engine I'd guess. Each of the heads had 1 cylinder badly "burned", as
shown. Anybody know what happened?

Looks like a valve broke off and beat the **** out of everything
rattling around inside the cylinder. Looks like they kept it
running as long as the could after it started banging and clanking.




When the cambelt snaps or loses a tooth, this is exactly what it looks like.
We've seen engines with all 16 valves and most of the followers scrap!
Skimp on a £60 belt/tensioner roller kit and a couple of hours labour each
60k miles or so, and cost yourself £2000 in rebuild charges. Progress
eh...........

JB

On Mar 19, 5:23*pm, Stanley Schaefer wrote:

One question is why two cylinders would drop valves at the
same time.

Two possibilities come to mind:

1) Running out of oil (or badly overheating) might cause more than one
valve to stick in the guides fairly quickly.

2) Timing chain/belt skipped, throwing the timing off enough for 2
cylinders to crash (though I would have expected the same from all 4
if 2 went, maybe I'm missing something).

Gunner Asch fired this volley in
:

Thats not burned..that had something in it. Someone dumped a handful of
nuts down the carby?


Yeah... that sucker swallowed something it couldn't digest.

LLoyd

On 19-Mar-2012 17:38, JB wrote:
"jim""sjedgingN0Sp"@m@mwt,net wrote in message
.. .

Bob Engelhardt wrote:

There were 2 heads at the dump, each for 2 cylinders - from a a v4

When the cambelt snaps or loses a tooth, this is exactly what it looks like.

A V4 would make me think of a motorcycle engine. It could have been
going 12,000 RPM when this happened. Another possibility, besides
a broken timing belt, might be a floating valve getting whacked.
But two cylinders in the same motor makes me think it had to be the
timing belt. Makes me kinda queasy thinking about it.

__________________________________________________ __________________
Gardner Buchanan gbuchana(a)teksavvy(dot)com
FreeBSD: Where you want to go. Today.

Bob Engelhardt wrote:
There were 2 heads at the dump, each for 2 cylinders - from a a v4
engine I'd guess. Each of the heads had 1 cylinder badly "burned", as
shown. Anybody know what happened?

Just curious,
Bob

http://home.comcast.net/~bobengelhardt/EngineHead.jpg

Looks like timing belt/chain failure. That stuck 2 valves out in each
cylinder for the piston to hit. These break off then rattle around in
the cylinder and beat the crap out of everything. This is the end
result. You DID pick up those heads didn't you??? They are GREAT to cut
up, melt down and use for casting your own projects.

--
Steve W.

Steve W. wrote:
Bob Engelhardt wrote:
There were 2 heads at the dump, each for 2 cylinders - from a a v4
engine I'd guess. Each of the heads had 1 cylinder badly "burned",
as shown. Anybody know what happened?

Just curious,
Bob

http://home.comcast.net/~bobengelhardt/EngineHead.jpg

Looks like timing belt/chain failure. That stuck 2 valves out in each
cylinder for the piston to hit. These break off then rattle around in
the cylinder and beat the crap out of everything. This is the end
result. You DID pick up those heads didn't you??? They are GREAT to
cut up, melt down and use for casting your own projects.

Typically they would be. A mate that works in engine development has
mentioned that the heads are invariably cast from virgin aluminium in
order to guarantee the material behaves as required, at least the major
players.

On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 00:23:24 +0000, David Billington
wrote:

Steve W. wrote:
Bob Engelhardt wrote:
There were 2 heads at the dump, each for 2 cylinders - from a a v4
engine I'd guess. Each of the heads had 1 cylinder badly "burned",
as shown. Anybody know what happened?

Just curious,
Bob

http://home.comcast.net/~bobengelhardt/EngineHead.jpg

Looks like timing belt/chain failure. That stuck 2 valves out in each
cylinder for the piston to hit. These break off then rattle around in
the cylinder and beat the crap out of everything. This is the end
result. You DID pick up those heads didn't you??? They are GREAT to
cut up, melt down and use for casting your own projects.

Typically they would be. A mate that works in engine development has
mentioned that the heads are invariably cast from virgin aluminium in
order to guarantee the material behaves as required, at least the major
players.

Generally they are 319 or 356 alloys, with some "fine tuning" for the
casting process in use. That's good stuff and good for casting by any
method -- particularly the 356.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress wrote:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 00:23:24 +0000, David Billington
wrote:

Steve W. wrote:
Bob Engelhardt wrote:
There were 2 heads at the dump, each for 2 cylinders - from a a v4
engine I'd guess. Each of the heads had 1 cylinder badly "burned",
as shown. Anybody know what happened?

Just curious,
Bob

http://home.comcast.net/~bobengelhardt/EngineHead.jpg
Looks like timing belt/chain failure. That stuck 2 valves out in each
cylinder for the piston to hit. These break off then rattle around in
the cylinder and beat the crap out of everything. This is the end
result. You DID pick up those heads didn't you??? They are GREAT to
cut up, melt down and use for casting your own projects.

Typically they would be. A mate that works in engine development has
mentioned that the heads are invariably cast from virgin aluminium in
order to guarantee the material behaves as required, at least the major
players.

Generally they are 319 or 356 alloys, with some "fine tuning" for the
casting process in use. That's good stuff and good for casting by any
method -- particularly the 356.


I grab complete engines, rims, scrap pistons, rods and the like. Sort
them per claimed alloys then melt and ingot them.

I know that the melting changes the alloy some but for 99% of what I
cast they are close enough...

--
Steve W.

Oh, yeah ... broken valve. It's right there, embedded in the head. The
surface just looked so molten that I thought "heat". And I did take
them for casting stock. I didn't appreciate the special-ness of the
alloy, but I knew that I could use them. I didn't see the rest of the
engine & it's had to believe that it could be repaired. It could still
turn up.

Thanks,
Bob

On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 21:00:01 -0400, "Steve W."
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 00:23:24 +0000, David Billington
wrote:

Steve W. wrote:
Bob Engelhardt wrote:
There were 2 heads at the dump, each for 2 cylinders - from a a v4
engine I'd guess. Each of the heads had 1 cylinder badly "burned",
as shown. Anybody know what happened?

Just curious,
Bob

http://home.comcast.net/~bobengelhardt/EngineHead.jpg
Looks like timing belt/chain failure. That stuck 2 valves out in each
cylinder for the piston to hit. These break off then rattle around in
the cylinder and beat the crap out of everything. This is the end
result. You DID pick up those heads didn't you??? They are GREAT to
cut up, melt down and use for casting your own projects.

Typically they would be. A mate that works in engine development has
mentioned that the heads are invariably cast from virgin aluminium in
order to guarantee the material behaves as required, at least the major
players.

Generally they are 319 or 356 alloys, with some "fine tuning" for the
casting process in use. That's good stuff and good for casting by any
method -- particularly the 356.


I grab complete engines, rims, scrap pistons, rods and the like. Sort
them per claimed alloys then melt and ingot them.

I know that the melting changes the alloy some but for 99% of what I
cast they are close enough..

Sure. The big cast pieces, including the block and head(s), are really
good for sand casting or (in the case of 356) for plaster casting. I
don't know about 319 for plaster casting. It's probably Ok. Either one
can be cast in metal molds, too. 356 can tolerate fairly slow cooling
without dendrite enlargement, which can make them brittle. It would be
a good choice for casting in Petrobond, too, for the same reason.

Cast pistons typically are a high-silicon, low-thermal-expansion
alloy. They're really made for diecasting but they're pretty forgiving
(except to your cutting tools). You should be able to sand cast them
just fine.

I don't know about the other stuff. Little bits, like hose fittings
and the like, also are high-silicon -- often hypereutectic. They're
generally easy to cast. Structural parts may be 6061. You can cast
6061, although it's really designed as a wrought alloy.

--
Ed Huntress

On 3/19/2012 7:28 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 00:23:24 +0000, David Billington
wrote:

Steve W. wrote:
Bob Engelhardt wrote:
There were 2 heads at the dump, each for 2 cylinders - from a a v4
engine I'd guess. Each of the heads had 1 cylinder badly "burned",
as shown. Anybody know what happened?

Just curious,
Bob

http://home.comcast.net/~bobengelhardt/EngineHead.jpg

Looks like timing belt/chain failure. That stuck 2 valves out in each
cylinder for the piston to hit. These break off then rattle around in
the cylinder and beat the crap out of everything. This is the end
result. You DID pick up those heads didn't you??? They are GREAT to
cut up, melt down and use for casting your own projects.

Typically they would be. A mate that works in engine development has
mentioned that the heads are invariably cast from virgin aluminium in
order to guarantee the material behaves as required, at least the major
players.

Generally they are 319 or 356 alloys, with some "fine tuning" for the
casting process in use. That's good stuff and good for casting by any
method -- particularly the 356.



I'm curious what it takes to do that.
I've cast lead for ballast with nothing more than a propane torch,
albeit a big one.

What does it take to cast aluminum?
Beyond the obvious heat, what are the dangers?

Bob Engelhardt on Mon, 19 Mar 2012
16:59:10 -0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
There were 2 heads at the dump, each for 2 cylinders - from a a v4
engine I'd guess. Each of the heads had 1 cylinder badly "burned", as
shown. Anybody know what happened?

Yep.

Valve snapped off. Beat the hell out of the piston, and the head.
I'd wager the head is aluminum, with fins - 'cause it sure looks like
a VW head after it ate the valve.

Air cooled VWs are notorious for doing that: you have to check the
valve settings every time you service it, and replace the valves ~
50,000 miles - just to be safe.

On third look, that's a four valve head. Doubt it is a VW, but
.... the valve snapped off and beat it all to hell and back.
--
pyotr
Go not to the Net for answers, for it will tell you Yes and no. And
you are a bloody fool, only an ignorant cretin would even ask the
question, forty two, 47, the second door, and how many blonde lawyers
does it take to change a lightbulb.

Bob Engelhardt on Mon, 19 Mar 2012
21:24:15 -0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
Oh, yeah ... broken valve. It's right there, embedded in the head. The
surface just looked so molten that I thought "heat". And I did take
them for casting stock. I didn't appreciate the special-ness of the
alloy, but I knew that I could use them. I didn't see the rest of the
engine & it's had to believe that it could be repaired. It could still
turn up.

All Depends. I know the old VW engines, when this happened, we'd
ordered a replacement head and pistons, then inspected the cylinder
for gouges, and then some times cracked the case to look for "stray
bits" of piston etc.
So the rest of the engine might be in use.
--
pyotr
Go not to the Net for answers, for it will tell you Yes and no. And
you are a bloody fool, only an ignorant cretin would even ask the
question, forty two, 47, the second door, and how many blonde lawyers
does it take to change a lightbulb.

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 21:00:01 -0400, "Steve W."
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 00:23:24 +0000, David Billington
wrote:

Steve W. wrote:
Bob Engelhardt wrote:
There were 2 heads at the dump, each for 2 cylinders - from a a v4
engine I'd guess. Each of the heads had 1 cylinder badly "burned",
as shown. Anybody know what happened?

Just curious,
Bob

http://home.comcast.net/~bobengelhardt/EngineHead.jpg
Looks like timing belt/chain failure. That stuck 2 valves out in each
cylinder for the piston to hit. These break off then rattle around in
the cylinder and beat the crap out of everything. This is the end
result. You DID pick up those heads didn't you??? They are GREAT to
cut up, melt down and use for casting your own projects.

Typically they would be. A mate that works in engine development has
mentioned that the heads are invariably cast from virgin aluminium in
order to guarantee the material behaves as required, at least the major
players.

Generally they are 319 or 356 alloys, with some "fine tuning" for the
casting process in use. That's good stuff and good for casting by any
method -- particularly the 356.


I grab complete engines, rims, scrap pistons, rods and the like. Sort
them per claimed alloys then melt and ingot them.

I know that the melting changes the alloy some but for 99% of what I
cast they are close enough..

Sure. The big cast pieces, including the block and head(s), are really
good for sand casting or (in the case of 356) for plaster casting. I
don't know about 319 for plaster casting. It's probably Ok. Either one
can be cast in metal molds, too. 356 can tolerate fairly slow cooling
without dendrite enlargement, which can make them brittle. It would be
a good choice for casting in Petrobond, too, for the same reason.

Cast pistons typically are a high-silicon, low-thermal-expansion
alloy. They're really made for diecasting but they're pretty forgiving
(except to your cutting tools). You should be able to sand cast them
just fine.

I don't know about the other stuff. Little bits, like hose fittings
and the like, also are high-silicon -- often hypereutectic. They're
generally easy to cast. Structural parts may be 6061. You can cast
6061, although it's really designed as a wrought alloy.


356 basically means instant death to HSS tooling and carbide really doesn't
last very long either.

On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 19:14:25 -0400, jeff wrote:

On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 16:59:10 -0400, Bob Engelhardt
wrote:

There were 2 heads at the dump, each for 2 cylinders - from a a v4
engine I'd guess. Each of the heads had 1 cylinder badly "burned", as
shown. Anybody know what happened?

Just curious,
Bob

http://home.comcast.net/~bobengelhardt/EngineHead.jpg


I'm surprised that the rest of the engine wasn't there as well. Looks
like it sucked a valve and most likely took out the piston and
cylinder as well. That must have been noisy before it was shut down
or came to a screeching halt.

Wow, no kidding! It looks like it was either revving high when it
happened or was run for a long while after that valve cut loose.
That's a fully -peened- finish, innit?

--
When you are kind to someone in trouble, you hope they'll remember
and be kind to someone else. And it'll become like a wildfire.
-- Whoopi Goldberg

On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 19:52:54 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 21:00:01 -0400, "Steve W."
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 00:23:24 +0000, David Billington
wrote:

Steve W. wrote:
Bob Engelhardt wrote:
There were 2 heads at the dump, each for 2 cylinders - from a a v4
engine I'd guess. Each of the heads had 1 cylinder badly "burned",
as shown. Anybody know what happened?

Just curious,
Bob

http://home.comcast.net/~bobengelhardt/EngineHead.jpg
Looks like timing belt/chain failure. That stuck 2 valves out in each
cylinder for the piston to hit. These break off then rattle around in
the cylinder and beat the crap out of everything. This is the end
result. You DID pick up those heads didn't you??? They are GREAT to
cut up, melt down and use for casting your own projects.

Typically they would be. A mate that works in engine development has
mentioned that the heads are invariably cast from virgin aluminium in
order to guarantee the material behaves as required, at least the major
players.

Generally they are 319 or 356 alloys, with some "fine tuning" for the
casting process in use. That's good stuff and good for casting by any
method -- particularly the 356.


I grab complete engines, rims, scrap pistons, rods and the like. Sort
them per claimed alloys then melt and ingot them.

I know that the melting changes the alloy some but for 99% of what I
cast they are close enough..

Sure. The big cast pieces, including the block and head(s), are really
good for sand casting or (in the case of 356) for plaster casting. I
don't know about 319 for plaster casting. It's probably Ok. Either one
can be cast in metal molds, too. 356 can tolerate fairly slow cooling
without dendrite enlargement, which can make them brittle. It would be
a good choice for casting in Petrobond, too, for the same reason.

Cast pistons typically are a high-silicon, low-thermal-expansion
alloy. They're really made for diecasting but they're pretty forgiving
(except to your cutting tools). You should be able to sand cast them
just fine.

I don't know about the other stuff. Little bits, like hose fittings
and the like, also are high-silicon -- often hypereutectic. They're
generally easy to cast. Structural parts may be 6061. You can cast
6061, although it's really designed as a wrought alloy.


356 basically means instant death to HSS tooling and carbide really doesn't
last very long either.


Any of the high-silicon alloys will precipitate some silicon, which
tears up HSS. 356 is around 7% -- much less than the eutectic level of
11.7% -- but the mix is not perfectly even and a bit of silicon drops
out of solution.

But the hypereutectic piston alloys are around 18%. At that level,
much of the silicon precipitates out upon cooling, producing crystals
that are real hell on conventional tools.

Diamond tools are the trick for production. But for onesies/twosies,
I've used HSS and just accept that you have to hone it after every
couple of parts.

--
Ed Huntress

On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 16:59:10 -0400, Bob Engelhardt
wrote:

There were 2 heads at the dump, each for 2 cylinders - from a a v4
engine I'd guess. Each of the heads had 1 cylinder badly "burned", as
shown. Anybody know what happened?

Just curious,
Bob

http://home.comcast.net/~bobengelhardt/EngineHead.jpg


Hey Bob,

Looks more like it snapped the valve off for some reason and pounded
it around in there, rather than being "burnt".

Take care.

Brian Lawson

On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 16:59:10 -0400, Bob Engelhardt
wrote:

There were 2 heads at the dump, each for 2 cylinders - from a a v4
engine I'd guess. Each of the heads had 1 cylinder badly "burned", as
shown. Anybody know what happened?

Just curious,
Bob

http://home.comcast.net/~bobengelhardt/EngineHead.jpg

That looks more like something was bouncing around in the combustion
chamber - like the missing valve head?
--
Cheers,

John B.

Possibly a 4-cylinder HO horizontally opposed, and water cooled, so maybe a
Subaru engine.

Like the others have commented, it's likely a valve head separated from the
stem and was being pounded into the combustion chamber by the piston.. for
quite a while, it seems.

I've seen pistons with valve heads imbedded in the tops of the pistons
before.. but somehow, the valve head just kept glancing off of the surfaces
it was contacting in this engine.. not easy to visualize in a HO engine
cylinder, though.

The 2 heads may not have been on the same engine when the failures
occurred.. just guessin'.

--
WB
..........


"Bob Engelhardt" wrote in message
...
There were 2 heads at the dump, each for 2 cylinders - from a a v4 engine
I'd guess. Each of the heads had 1 cylinder badly "burned", as shown.
Anybody know what happened?

Just curious,
Bob

http://home.comcast.net/~bobengelhardt/EngineHead.jpg

On Mar 19, 4:59*pm, Bob Engelhardt wrote:
There were 2 heads at the dump, each for 2 cylinders - from a a v4
engine I'd guess. *Each of the heads had 1 cylinder badly "burned", as
shown. *Anybody know what happened?

Just curious,
Bob

http://home.comcast.net/~bobengelhardt/EngineHead.jpg

Could be from a subaru...the interference variants eat the valves when
the timing belt breaks/slips/loses teeth.

Ed Huntress wrote:
Generally they are 319 or 356 alloys, with some "fine tuning" for the
casting process in use. That's good stuff and good for casting by any
method -- particularly the 356.

I grab complete engines, rims, scrap pistons, rods and the like. Sort
them per claimed alloys then melt and ingot them.

I know that the melting changes the alloy some but for 99% of what I
cast they are close enough..

Sure. The big cast pieces, including the block and head(s), are really
good for sand casting or (in the case of 356) for plaster casting. I
don't know about 319 for plaster casting. It's probably Ok. Either one
can be cast in metal molds, too. 356 can tolerate fairly slow cooling
without dendrite enlargement, which can make them brittle. It would be
a good choice for casting in Petrobond, too, for the same reason.

Cast pistons typically are a high-silicon, low-thermal-expansion
alloy. They're really made for diecasting but they're pretty forgiving
(except to your cutting tools). You should be able to sand cast them
just fine.

I don't know about the other stuff. Little bits, like hose fittings
and the like, also are high-silicon -- often hypereutectic. They're
generally easy to cast. Structural parts may be 6061. You can cast
6061, although it's really designed as a wrought alloy.


I use the oddball stuff for items where the strength isn't a real issue,
Decorative stuff or covers and such.
The high silicon gets used for wear related items. I like using it for
castings that will end up handling abrasive abuse or in locations where
it will be the wear surface. Yes it can be a real PIA to machine but it
wears real well once finished.

It makes REALLY nice bullet molds.

I use various molds, sand, metal, lost wax/plaster. Two home built
furnaces. One is electric and one gas. The electric is NICE for temp
control and even heating. The gas is much faster to full heat but hard
on alloys.

--
Steve W.

Richard wrote:
On 3/19/2012 7:28 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 00:23:24 +0000, David Billington
wrote:

Steve W. wrote:
Bob Engelhardt wrote:
There were 2 heads at the dump, each for 2 cylinders - from a a v4
engine I'd guess. Each of the heads had 1 cylinder badly "burned",
as shown. Anybody know what happened?

Just curious,
Bob

http://home.comcast.net/~bobengelhardt/EngineHead.jpg
Looks like timing belt/chain failure. That stuck 2 valves out in each
cylinder for the piston to hit. These break off then rattle around in
the cylinder and beat the crap out of everything. This is the end
result. You DID pick up those heads didn't you??? They are GREAT to
cut up, melt down and use for casting your own projects.

Typically they would be. A mate that works in engine development has
mentioned that the heads are invariably cast from virgin aluminium in
order to guarantee the material behaves as required, at least the major
players.
Generally they are 319 or 356 alloys, with some "fine tuning" for the
casting process in use. That's good stuff and good for casting by any
method -- particularly the 356.



I'm curious what it takes to do that.
I've cast lead for ballast with nothing more than a propane torch,
albeit a big one.

What does it take to cast aluminum?
Beyond the obvious heat, what are the dangers?


LOT's of controlled heat. I use propane for one furnace and electric for
another. Each has Pros/Cons.

The BIG pro with the electric is that you can ramp the heat down VERY
slowly to control problem alloys.

Danger wise it is similar to lead, HOT metal that can start fires if it
hits flammable materials. I have a 4" DRY sand layer over the concrete
floor in the casting area. Molds can be more precise IF you know the
metals shrinkage rates.

Personal protective gear needs to be better because of the higher temps.

It is real nice though to have as a skill since with it many
"unrepairable" castings become repairable. I have taken damaged
castings, built up damaged/worn areas with bondo, sprayed them with
spray-fil to compensate for shrinkage, then used them to create a mold
and cast a new part. Have a couple garden pulling tractors around with
"factory" carbs that have subtle work done in the bores and passages to
increase flow that look totally stock down to the casting numbers....
Or how about a casting that keeps failing due to poor design or extra
stress. You can make a mold, add stiffening fillets, embed steel rods,
add material or whatever else you need. On one of our fire engines the
water drain manifold was a crappy design with a bunch of plain steel
fittings cobbled together and lines running everywhere along. I cast up
a new one out of alloy that has PEX style hose connections, single
outlet with molded in mounting ears and a much more dependable valve
control.

--
Steve W.

Larry Jaques wrote:
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 19:14:25 -0400, jeff wrote:

On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 16:59:10 -0400, Bob Engelhardt
wrote:

There were 2 heads at the dump, each for 2 cylinders - from a a v4
engine I'd guess. Each of the heads had 1 cylinder badly "burned", as
shown. Anybody know what happened?

Just curious,
Bob

http://home.comcast.net/~bobengelhardt/EngineHead.jpg

I'm surprised that the rest of the engine wasn't there as well. Looks
like it sucked a valve and most likely took out the piston and
cylinder as well. That must have been noisy before it was shut down
or came to a screeching halt.

Wow, no kidding! It looks like it was either revving high when it
happened or was run for a long while after that valve cut loose.
That's a fully -peened- finish, innit?

--

I'm thinking this was from a crotch rocket in the hands of a 20
something who just kept it wound tight. Lot's of them around this area
who don't even seem phased at all when an engine let's go.

--
Steve W.

On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 14:56:56 -0400, "Steve W."
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
Generally they are 319 or 356 alloys, with some "fine tuning" for the
casting process in use. That's good stuff and good for casting by any
method -- particularly the 356.

I grab complete engines, rims, scrap pistons, rods and the like. Sort
them per claimed alloys then melt and ingot them.

I know that the melting changes the alloy some but for 99% of what I
cast they are close enough..

Sure. The big cast pieces, including the block and head(s), are really
good for sand casting or (in the case of 356) for plaster casting. I
don't know about 319 for plaster casting. It's probably Ok. Either one
can be cast in metal molds, too. 356 can tolerate fairly slow cooling
without dendrite enlargement, which can make them brittle. It would be
a good choice for casting in Petrobond, too, for the same reason.

Cast pistons typically are a high-silicon, low-thermal-expansion
alloy. They're really made for diecasting but they're pretty forgiving
(except to your cutting tools). You should be able to sand cast them
just fine.

I don't know about the other stuff. Little bits, like hose fittings
and the like, also are high-silicon -- often hypereutectic. They're
generally easy to cast. Structural parts may be 6061. You can cast
6061, although it's really designed as a wrought alloy.


I use the oddball stuff for items where the strength isn't a real issue,
Decorative stuff or covers and such.
The high silicon gets used for wear related items. I like using it for
castings that will end up handling abrasive abuse or in locations where
it will be the wear surface. Yes it can be a real PIA to machine but it
wears real well once finished.

It makes REALLY nice bullet molds.

I use various molds, sand, metal, lost wax/plaster. Two home built
furnaces. One is electric and one gas. The electric is NICE for temp
control and even heating. The gas is much faster to full heat but hard
on alloys.

I'd like to get into it some more, and I'm half-equipped, thanks to
the generosity of onr of our regulars here. Now I have to build a
furnace. I built one of those little Gingery charcoal furnaces around
20 years ago, and it was enough to get me interested, but it
deteriorated and I haven't replaced it yet with something better.

Soon...

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress wrote:

I use the oddball stuff for items where the strength isn't a real issue,
Decorative stuff or covers and such.
The high silicon gets used for wear related items. I like using it for
castings that will end up handling abrasive abuse or in locations where
it will be the wear surface. Yes it can be a real PIA to machine but it
wears real well once finished.

It makes REALLY nice bullet molds.

I use various molds, sand, metal, lost wax/plaster. Two home built
furnaces. One is electric and one gas. The electric is NICE for temp
control and even heating. The gas is much faster to full heat but hard
on alloys.

I'd like to get into it some more, and I'm half-equipped, thanks to
the generosity of onr of our regulars here. Now I have to build a
furnace. I built one of those little Gingery charcoal furnaces around
20 years ago, and it was enough to get me interested, but it
deteriorated and I haven't replaced it yet with something better.

Soon...


I started with a charcoal unit. They work BUT the temperature control is
REALLY difficult to do with repeatable results.
The gas units work pretty well IF you have a source of low priced gas to
feed them. These days that can be difficult if you don't have a NG line
already.

This was the basic idea I used for my electric.

http://www.dansworkshop.com/2008/03/...ing-furnace-2/

Mine is larger than this and has better temperature controls (from an
industrial oven with three temperature sensors)

From a cold start I can have a batch ready to pour in about an 1.5
hours. The batches after that take about 30-45 minutes after loading.

The gas unit takes about 45 minutes from a cold start and 20 or so for
each additional batch. But you don't have the thermal control over the melt.

--
Steve W.

Steve W. wrote:
Ed Huntress wrote:

I use the oddball stuff for items where the strength isn't a real
issue, Decorative stuff or covers and such.
The high silicon gets used for wear related items. I like using it
for castings that will end up handling abrasive abuse or in
locations where it will be the wear surface. Yes it can be a real
PIA to machine but it wears real well once finished.

It makes REALLY nice bullet molds.

I use various molds, sand, metal, lost wax/plaster. Two home built
furnaces. One is electric and one gas. The electric is NICE for temp
control and even heating. The gas is much faster to full heat but
hard on alloys.

I'd like to get into it some more, and I'm half-equipped, thanks to
the generosity of onr of our regulars here. Now I have to build a
furnace. I built one of those little Gingery charcoal furnaces around
20 years ago, and it was enough to get me interested, but it
deteriorated and I haven't replaced it yet with something better.

Soon...


I started with a charcoal unit. They work BUT the temperature control
is REALLY difficult to do with repeatable results.
The gas units work pretty well IF you have a source of low priced gas
to feed them. These days that can be difficult if you don't have a NG
line already.

This was the basic idea I used for my electric.

http://www.dansworkshop.com/2008/03/...ing-furnace-2/

Mine is larger than this and has better temperature controls (from an
industrial oven with three temperature sensors)

From a cold start I can have a batch ready to pour in about an 1.5
hours. The batches after that take about 30-45 minutes after loading.

The gas unit takes about 45 minutes from a cold start and 20 or so for
each additional batch. But you don't have the thermal control over the
melt.

I would expect you could get better control of a gas fired unit by
adding a hi low fire unit controlled by a temperature controller. It's
fairly common for certain applications such as glass melting furnaces
and I built a gas fired glass annealing oven with one for a friend which
held around 500C. Basically for the annealer a burner that can run at
low or high output and a solenoid to turn on the high output when the
temperature dropped or the ramp rate needed to be higher. For the
annealing oven the burner was an inspirator so only the gas was
controlled. The low and high end each had a gas control valve to control
the heat output, the low always being on, and the high kicking in when
the solenoid was energised by the temperature controller.

In article ,
Bob Engelhardt wrote:
Each of the heads had 1 cylinder badly "burned", as
shown. Anybody know what happened?


For comparison, here's a shot of a six cylinder Jaguar head
with similar damage:

http://haskey.com/johnh/19980626JAG/frame23.JPG

Presumably a valve stuck open, piston smacked it, bounced
it around for a while, piston shattered, more bouncing
around, engine stopped dead when piece of piston was wedged
between connecting rod and bottom skirt of cylinder. Fun
times!

---john.

On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 16:50:11 -0400, "Steve W."
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:

I use the oddball stuff for items where the strength isn't a real issue,
Decorative stuff or covers and such.
The high silicon gets used for wear related items. I like using it for
castings that will end up handling abrasive abuse or in locations where
it will be the wear surface. Yes it can be a real PIA to machine but it
wears real well once finished.

It makes REALLY nice bullet molds.

I use various molds, sand, metal, lost wax/plaster. Two home built
furnaces. One is electric and one gas. The electric is NICE for temp
control and even heating. The gas is much faster to full heat but hard
on alloys.

I'd like to get into it some more, and I'm half-equipped, thanks to
the generosity of onr of our regulars here. Now I have to build a
furnace. I built one of those little Gingery charcoal furnaces around
20 years ago, and it was enough to get me interested, but it
deteriorated and I haven't replaced it yet with something better.

Soon...


I started with a charcoal unit. They work BUT the temperature control is
REALLY difficult to do with repeatable results.
The gas units work pretty well IF you have a source of low priced gas to
feed them. These days that can be difficult if you don't have a NG line
already.

This was the basic idea I used for my electric.

http://www.dansworkshop.com/2008/03/...ing-furnace-2/

Mine is larger than this and has better temperature controls (from an
industrial oven with three temperature sensors)

From a cold start I can have a batch ready to pour in about an 1.5
hours. The batches after that take about 30-45 minutes after loading.

The gas unit takes about 45 minutes from a cold start and 20 or so for
each additional batch. But you don't have the thermal control over the melt.

I'd like to see one run. Did you use Kastolite, or what?

What's your opinion on this, Steve: Gas or electric? I won't do a lot
of melting. It will be pretty basic stuff. I can handle the electicals
or a gas burner. I have natural gas but I'm not in a hurry for melts,
so I don't care about that.

What's the voltage and current draw on those things? Which do you
think is easier to build?

Thanks for your thoughts. I do know about the many online sources of
info, which I'll wade through when I'm ready for this. But since you
have both electric and gas, I'd really like your opinion.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress wrote:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 16:50:11 -0400, "Steve W."
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:

I use the oddball stuff for items where the strength isn't a real issue,
Decorative stuff or covers and such.
The high silicon gets used for wear related items. I like using it for
castings that will end up handling abrasive abuse or in locations where
it will be the wear surface. Yes it can be a real PIA to machine but it
wears real well once finished.

It makes REALLY nice bullet molds.

I use various molds, sand, metal, lost wax/plaster. Two home built
furnaces. One is electric and one gas. The electric is NICE for temp
control and even heating. The gas is much faster to full heat but hard
on alloys.
I'd like to get into it some more, and I'm half-equipped, thanks to
the generosity of onr of our regulars here. Now I have to build a
furnace. I built one of those little Gingery charcoal furnaces around
20 years ago, and it was enough to get me interested, but it
deteriorated and I haven't replaced it yet with something better.

Soon...

I started with a charcoal unit. They work BUT the temperature control is
REALLY difficult to do with repeatable results.
The gas units work pretty well IF you have a source of low priced gas to
feed them. These days that can be difficult if you don't have a NG line
already.

This was the basic idea I used for my electric.

http://www.dansworkshop.com/2008/03/...ing-furnace-2/

Mine is larger than this and has better temperature controls (from an
industrial oven with three temperature sensors)

From a cold start I can have a batch ready to pour in about an 1.5
hours. The batches after that take about 30-45 minutes after loading.

The gas unit takes about 45 minutes from a cold start and 20 or so for
each additional batch. But you don't have the thermal control over the melt.

I'd like to see one run. Did you use Kastolite, or what?

First one I used a home mix: 1 1/2 parts Portland cement, 2 parts
silica sand, 1 3/4 parts perlite and 2 parts fine fireclay Has held up
very well so far.

The newer one uses Mincast and firebrick.

If I do another it will be the home mix again, easier, cheaper and it
seems to hold up better.

I built the new one with a double wall as well. If you look at dans unit
just add a second housing with simple fiberglass insulation around it
inside a stainless cover. It reduced the radiated heat a LOT...



What's your opinion on this, Steve: Gas or electric? I won't do a lot
of melting. It will be pretty basic stuff. I can handle the electicals
or a gas burner. I have natural gas but I'm not in a hurry for melts,
so I don't care about that.

Hands down the electric. No dealing with gas plumbing or possible
leaks, no cleaning of jets or playing with the air mix to get it right,
no worries about what/if the gas is an odd mix that might add something
to the blend, MUCH more portable due to easier power access, and it is
MUCH, MUCH quieter than gas. Most of the gas units sound like let
engines which gets old really quick. With the electric you hear the
click of the contactors and the occasional sound of shifting metal in
the crucible.


What's the voltage and current draw on those things?

220-240 volts
My small electric has an inrush of around 18 amps on initial start and
that drops to about 15 once it is warmed up.
The big one takes about 40 on initial start and drops to 32-34 once warm.

Which do you think is easier to build?

Electric. BUT getting the room for the coil can be interesting. The
new one was easier sinse I knew what to expect. I used a sonotube
section with a thin sheet of foil around it. Then a coil of 1/2" black
poly around that secured with hot glue.


Thanks for your thoughts. I do know about the many online sources of
info, which I'll wade through when I'm ready for this. But since you
have both electric and gas, I'd really like your opinion.



--
Steve W.

On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 22:45:39 -0400, "Steve W."
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 16:50:11 -0400, "Steve W."
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:

I use the oddball stuff for items where the strength isn't a real issue,
Decorative stuff or covers and such.
The high silicon gets used for wear related items. I like using it for
castings that will end up handling abrasive abuse or in locations where
it will be the wear surface. Yes it can be a real PIA to machine but it
wears real well once finished.

It makes REALLY nice bullet molds.

I use various molds, sand, metal, lost wax/plaster. Two home built
furnaces. One is electric and one gas. The electric is NICE for temp
control and even heating. The gas is much faster to full heat but hard
on alloys.
I'd like to get into it some more, and I'm half-equipped, thanks to
the generosity of onr of our regulars here. Now I have to build a
furnace. I built one of those little Gingery charcoal furnaces around
20 years ago, and it was enough to get me interested, but it
deteriorated and I haven't replaced it yet with something better.

Soon...

I started with a charcoal unit. They work BUT the temperature control is
REALLY difficult to do with repeatable results.
The gas units work pretty well IF you have a source of low priced gas to
feed them. These days that can be difficult if you don't have a NG line
already.

This was the basic idea I used for my electric.

http://www.dansworkshop.com/2008/03/...ing-furnace-2/

Mine is larger than this and has better temperature controls (from an
industrial oven with three temperature sensors)

From a cold start I can have a batch ready to pour in about an 1.5
hours. The batches after that take about 30-45 minutes after loading.

The gas unit takes about 45 minutes from a cold start and 20 or so for
each additional batch. But you don't have the thermal control over the melt.

I'd like to see one run. Did you use Kastolite, or what?

First one I used a home mix: 1 1/2 parts Portland cement, 2 parts
silica sand, 1 3/4 parts perlite and 2 parts fine fireclay Has held up
very well so far.

The newer one uses Mincast and firebrick.

If I do another it will be the home mix again, easier, cheaper and it
seems to hold up better.

I built the new one with a double wall as well. If you look at dans unit
just add a second housing with simple fiberglass insulation around it
inside a stainless cover. It reduced the radiated heat a LOT...



What's your opinion on this, Steve: Gas or electric? I won't do a lot
of melting. It will be pretty basic stuff. I can handle the electicals
or a gas burner. I have natural gas but I'm not in a hurry for melts,
so I don't care about that.

Hands down the electric. No dealing with gas plumbing or possible
leaks, no cleaning of jets or playing with the air mix to get it right,
no worries about what/if the gas is an odd mix that might add something
to the blend, MUCH more portable due to easier power access, and it is
MUCH, MUCH quieter than gas. Most of the gas units sound like let
engines which gets old really quick. With the electric you hear the
click of the contactors and the occasional sound of shifting metal in
the crucible.


What's the voltage and current draw on those things?

220-240 volts
My small electric has an inrush of around 18 amps on initial start and
that drops to about 15 once it is warmed up.
The big one takes about 40 on initial start and drops to 32-34 once warm.

Which do you think is easier to build?

Electric. BUT getting the room for the coil can be interesting. The
new one was easier sinse I knew what to expect. I used a sonotube
section with a thin sheet of foil around it. Then a coil of 1/2" black
poly around that secured with hot glue.


Thanks for your thoughts. I do know about the many online sources of
info, which I'll wade through when I'm ready for this. But since you
have both electric and gas, I'd really like your opinion.



Ok, that's one is archived. Thanks very much.

I have one of Gingery's old books about building an electric furnace
around here somewhere. It may have been written by his son. I gather
that things have progressed beyond that for home foundries, yes?

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress wrote:
On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 22:45:39 -0400, "Steve W."
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 16:50:11 -0400, "Steve W."
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:

I use the oddball stuff for items where the strength isn't a real issue,
Decorative stuff or covers and such.
The high silicon gets used for wear related items. I like using it for
castings that will end up handling abrasive abuse or in locations where
it will be the wear surface. Yes it can be a real PIA to machine but it
wears real well once finished.

It makes REALLY nice bullet molds.

I use various molds, sand, metal, lost wax/plaster. Two home built
furnaces. One is electric and one gas. The electric is NICE for temp
control and even heating. The gas is much faster to full heat but hard
on alloys.
I'd like to get into it some more, and I'm half-equipped, thanks to
the generosity of onr of our regulars here. Now I have to build a
furnace. I built one of those little Gingery charcoal furnaces around
20 years ago, and it was enough to get me interested, but it
deteriorated and I haven't replaced it yet with something better.

Soon...

I started with a charcoal unit. They work BUT the temperature control is
REALLY difficult to do with repeatable results.
The gas units work pretty well IF you have a source of low priced gas to
feed them. These days that can be difficult if you don't have a NG line
already.

This was the basic idea I used for my electric.

http://www.dansworkshop.com/2008/03/...ing-furnace-2/

Mine is larger than this and has better temperature controls (from an
industrial oven with three temperature sensors)

From a cold start I can have a batch ready to pour in about an 1.5
hours. The batches after that take about 30-45 minutes after loading.

The gas unit takes about 45 minutes from a cold start and 20 or so for
each additional batch. But you don't have the thermal control over the melt.
I'd like to see one run. Did you use Kastolite, or what?
First one I used a home mix: 1 1/2 parts Portland cement, 2 parts
silica sand, 1 3/4 parts perlite and 2 parts fine fireclay Has held up
very well so far.

The newer one uses Mincast and firebrick.

If I do another it will be the home mix again, easier, cheaper and it
seems to hold up better.

I built the new one with a double wall as well. If you look at dans unit
just add a second housing with simple fiberglass insulation around it
inside a stainless cover. It reduced the radiated heat a LOT...


What's your opinion on this, Steve: Gas or electric? I won't do a lot
of melting. It will be pretty basic stuff. I can handle the electicals
or a gas burner. I have natural gas but I'm not in a hurry for melts,
so I don't care about that.
Hands down the electric. No dealing with gas plumbing or possible
leaks, no cleaning of jets or playing with the air mix to get it right,
no worries about what/if the gas is an odd mix that might add something
to the blend, MUCH more portable due to easier power access, and it is
MUCH, MUCH quieter than gas. Most of the gas units sound like let
engines which gets old really quick. With the electric you hear the
click of the contactors and the occasional sound of shifting metal in
the crucible.

What's the voltage and current draw on those things?
220-240 volts
My small electric has an inrush of around 18 amps on initial start and
that drops to about 15 once it is warmed up.
The big one takes about 40 on initial start and drops to 32-34 once warm.

Which do you think is easier to build?
Electric. BUT getting the room for the coil can be interesting. The
new one was easier sinse I knew what to expect. I used a sonotube
section with a thin sheet of foil around it. Then a coil of 1/2" black
poly around that secured with hot glue.

Thanks for your thoughts. I do know about the many online sources of
info, which I'll wade through when I'm ready for this. But since you
have both electric and gas, I'd really like your opinion.



Ok, that's one is archived. Thanks very much.

I have one of Gingery's old books about building an electric furnace
around here somewhere. It may have been written by his son. I gather
that things have progressed beyond that for home foundries, yes?


That all depends on how far you want to go, and how much you want to spend..

The Gingery furnace works but it isn't really easy to control if built
by the book. Most of the current designs use better controls and
materials. This allows a better pour because you can get a nice even
high temperature in the melt.

The big thing these days is that many more people have access to
information and sharing same. It really helps out when you can see what
works and what doesn't.

--
Steve W.

Steve W. wrote:
Ed Huntress wrote:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 16:50:11 -0400, "Steve W."
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:

I use the oddball stuff for items where the strength isn't a real
issue, Decorative stuff or covers and such.
The high silicon gets used for wear related items. I like using it
for castings that will end up handling abrasive abuse or in
locations where it will be the wear surface. Yes it can be a real
PIA to machine but it wears real well once finished.

It makes REALLY nice bullet molds.

I use various molds, sand, metal, lost wax/plaster. Two home built
furnaces. One is electric and one gas. The electric is NICE for
temp control and even heating. The gas is much faster to full heat
but hard on alloys.
I'd like to get into it some more, and I'm half-equipped, thanks to
the generosity of onr of our regulars here. Now I have to build a
furnace. I built one of those little Gingery charcoal furnaces around
20 years ago, and it was enough to get me interested, but it
deteriorated and I haven't replaced it yet with something better.

Soon...

I started with a charcoal unit. They work BUT the temperature
control is REALLY difficult to do with repeatable results.
The gas units work pretty well IF you have a source of low priced
gas to feed them. These days that can be difficult if you don't have
a NG line already.

This was the basic idea I used for my electric.

http://www.dansworkshop.com/2008/03/...ing-furnace-2/


Mine is larger than this and has better temperature controls (from
an industrial oven with three temperature sensors)

From a cold start I can have a batch ready to pour in about an 1.5
hours. The batches after that take about 30-45 minutes after loading.

The gas unit takes about 45 minutes from a cold start and 20 or so
for each additional batch. But you don't have the thermal control
over the melt.

I'd like to see one run. Did you use Kastolite, or what?

First one I used a home mix: 1 1/2 parts Portland cement, 2 parts
silica sand, 1 3/4 parts perlite and 2 parts fine fireclay Has held up
very well so far.

The newer one uses Mincast and firebrick.

If I do another it will be the home mix again, easier, cheaper and it
seems to hold up better.

I built the new one with a double wall as well. If you look at dans
unit just add a second housing with simple fiberglass insulation
around it inside a stainless cover. It reduced the radiated heat a LOT...



What's your opinion on this, Steve: Gas or electric? I won't do a lot
of melting. It will be pretty basic stuff. I can handle the electicals
or a gas burner. I have natural gas but I'm not in a hurry for melts,
so I don't care about that.

Hands down the electric. No dealing with gas plumbing or possible
leaks, no cleaning of jets or playing with the air mix to get it
right, no worries about what/if the gas is an odd mix that might add
something to the blend, MUCH more portable due to easier power access,
and it is MUCH, MUCH quieter than gas. Most of the gas units sound
like let engines which gets old really quick. With the electric you
hear the click of the contactors and the occasional sound of shifting
metal in the crucible.

Interesting the portability comment, I presume you mean mains gas. The
reason I made the glass annealing oven, I mentioned in another comment.
gas fired was due to portability. It had to be operated in a field with
no electric power unless you brought you own. The controller was powered
by an old 12V car battery and lasted the 5 days of the event. The burner
was run on bottled propane. I agree on the noise of gas fired furnaces
but a lot of that is due to burner design, they'll never be as quiet as
electric but multi hole burners can be much quieter than a single big
burner like many use.



What's the voltage and current draw on those things?

220-240 volts
My small electric has an inrush of around 18 amps on initial start and
that drops to about 15 once it is warmed up.
The big one takes about 40 on initial start and drops to 32-34 once warm.

Which do you think is easier to build?

Electric. BUT getting the room for the coil can be interesting. The
new one was easier sinse I knew what to expect. I used a sonotube
section with a thin sheet of foil around it. Then a coil of 1/2" black
poly around that secured with hot glue.


Thanks for your thoughts. I do know about the many online sources of
info, which I'll wade through when I'm ready for this. But since you
have both electric and gas, I'd really like your opinion.

On Thu, 22 Mar 2012 00:14:53 -0400, "Steve W."
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 22:45:39 -0400, "Steve W."
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 16:50:11 -0400, "Steve W."
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:

I use the oddball stuff for items where the strength isn't a real issue,
Decorative stuff or covers and such.
The high silicon gets used for wear related items. I like using it for
castings that will end up handling abrasive abuse or in locations where
it will be the wear surface. Yes it can be a real PIA to machine but it
wears real well once finished.

It makes REALLY nice bullet molds.

I use various molds, sand, metal, lost wax/plaster. Two home built
furnaces. One is electric and one gas. The electric is NICE for temp
control and even heating. The gas is much faster to full heat but hard
on alloys.
I'd like to get into it some more, and I'm half-equipped, thanks to
the generosity of onr of our regulars here. Now I have to build a
furnace. I built one of those little Gingery charcoal furnaces around
20 years ago, and it was enough to get me interested, but it
deteriorated and I haven't replaced it yet with something better.

Soon...

I started with a charcoal unit. They work BUT the temperature control is
REALLY difficult to do with repeatable results.
The gas units work pretty well IF you have a source of low priced gas to
feed them. These days that can be difficult if you don't have a NG line
already.

This was the basic idea I used for my electric.

http://www.dansworkshop.com/2008/03/...ing-furnace-2/

Mine is larger than this and has better temperature controls (from an
industrial oven with three temperature sensors)

From a cold start I can have a batch ready to pour in about an 1.5
hours. The batches after that take about 30-45 minutes after loading.

The gas unit takes about 45 minutes from a cold start and 20 or so for
each additional batch. But you don't have the thermal control over the melt.
I'd like to see one run. Did you use Kastolite, or what?
First one I used a home mix: 1 1/2 parts Portland cement, 2 parts
silica sand, 1 3/4 parts perlite and 2 parts fine fireclay Has held up
very well so far.

The newer one uses Mincast and firebrick.

If I do another it will be the home mix again, easier, cheaper and it
seems to hold up better.

I built the new one with a double wall as well. If you look at dans unit
just add a second housing with simple fiberglass insulation around it
inside a stainless cover. It reduced the radiated heat a LOT...


What's your opinion on this, Steve: Gas or electric? I won't do a lot
of melting. It will be pretty basic stuff. I can handle the electicals
or a gas burner. I have natural gas but I'm not in a hurry for melts,
so I don't care about that.
Hands down the electric. No dealing with gas plumbing or possible
leaks, no cleaning of jets or playing with the air mix to get it right,
no worries about what/if the gas is an odd mix that might add something
to the blend, MUCH more portable due to easier power access, and it is
MUCH, MUCH quieter than gas. Most of the gas units sound like let
engines which gets old really quick. With the electric you hear the
click of the contactors and the occasional sound of shifting metal in
the crucible.

What's the voltage and current draw on those things?
220-240 volts
My small electric has an inrush of around 18 amps on initial start and
that drops to about 15 once it is warmed up.
The big one takes about 40 on initial start and drops to 32-34 once warm.

Which do you think is easier to build?
Electric. BUT getting the room for the coil can be interesting. The
new one was easier sinse I knew what to expect. I used a sonotube
section with a thin sheet of foil around it. Then a coil of 1/2" black
poly around that secured with hot glue.

Thanks for your thoughts. I do know about the many online sources of
info, which I'll wade through when I'm ready for this. But since you
have both electric and gas, I'd really like your opinion.



Ok, that's one is archived. Thanks very much.

I have one of Gingery's old books about building an electric furnace
around here somewhere. It may have been written by his son. I gather
that things have progressed beyond that for home foundries, yes?


That all depends on how far you want to go, and how much you want to spend..

The Gingery furnace works but it isn't really easy to control if built
by the book. Most of the current designs use better controls and
materials. This allows a better pour because you can get a nice even
high temperature in the melt.

The big thing these days is that many more people have access to
information and sharing same. It really helps out when you can see what
works and what doesn't.

You can say that again. So many specialized and arcane interests...and
we seem to be able to find someone just as off-the-wall as we are.
Even dozens of them, with real experience and knowledge that just
isn't recorded anywhere else.

Someone posted a link to a boat plan yesterday, with a box keel and a
tunnel, which is based on the Sea Bright Skiff keel design. Being a
Sea Bright Skiff fanatic, I was tempted to jump in -- but I restrained
myself. It wasn't easy...

--
Ed Huntress