Subject: Re: Side Blast Forge Question

From: [email-masked] (Fred Clark)
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 21:53:22 -0500

>I have been entertaining thoughts of building a watercooled, side-blast forge
>similar to the one shown in the COSIRA book, "The Blacksmith's Craft".  I
>already have a good, Buffalo brand railroad-type forge with electric blower
>along with 2 gas forges, so this would be another unit to give some different
>heating characteristics (I hope).  I can put a good, Champion electric blower
>with airgate on this forge, but I'm wondering if anyone out there has any
>experience with them and is it worth the effort to build.  The type of work
>that I do consists mostly of ornamental smithing such as small to medium
>architectural projects and craft items.  Some of my thoughts are as follows:
>
>1.  It appears that the cast-iron, bottom blast pot is a fairly recent
>invention and the side blast was the predominant style for thousands of
>years.  I can't tell if the bottom blast became popular because it is better
>or that it was easier to produce commercially.  I've read that the
>watercooled side blast types tend to freeze in harsh climates (not a problem
>in Texas) and spring leaks due to the thermal cycling.  It seems that the
>side blast would use more fuel since the air is constantly pushing against
>the far side of the fire, but maybe one could put a fire brick in place to
>contain it.  A possible advantage is the ability to make a long fire or an
>oddly-shaped one (bricks again).  I also speculate that the tendency of
>molten clinker to blow up on the work will be reduced, but I have no proof of
>this (I have very dirty coal, so this is wishful thinking).
>2.  I plan to use stainless pipe to create the tuyere - probably 1" centered
>inside 2" to allow water circulation - the tank could be stainless or
>galvanized because it won't get hot enough to cause problems.  However, I
>wonder if stainless could be used without water, because it would sure be
>easier to build.  Maybe let the blowpipe stick out 12-16" from the back of
>the hearth and let it burn off.  It would be a simple matter to build another
>one when the burn-off reaches the hearth.
>
>I would appreciate information from anyone that has had real experience with
>this type of forge and what the advantages/disadvantages are.
>
>Thanks,     hollis

I may be all wrong, but it seems like I remember reading something years ago
about this type of forge having problems with clinker buildup (may be
getting senile, though).

---

From: [email-masked] (George Dixon)
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 07:43:10 -0500

My understanding of side-draft forges is that they evolved using charcoal
as a fuel, although many today use coal.  The tendency of charcoal to
'float' in a blast (due to its light weight) is reduced with the draft
coming in from the side.  I know several British smiths that still use
them.
George Dixon