Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Cones And Soaking Times Theory


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

#1 neilestrick

neilestrick

    Neil Estrick

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,522 posts
  • LocationGrayslake, IL

Posted 08 November 2013 - 10:15 AM

Nearly every day on this forum someone, often me, refers to cones and their importance in the ceramic firing process. I understand how cones work. I explain it to my students all the time. But this week I found myself with a question about cones I've never encountered before.

 

When it comes to soaking (holding temperature) in order to achieve heat work, we always tell people to test it with actual cones. I've heard anywhere from 15 minutes to 1 hour of soaking is necessary in order to gain one cone. There's no consistency to the system.

 

Here's my recent experience that has me somewhat baffled: I used to fire to cone 8 in oxidation (electric). In order to increase the life of my elements a bit, I would fire to cone 6 with a 40 minute hold to reach cone 8. Now I fire to cone 6, and I finally tested the hold time to see how long it would take me to get from cone 4 to cone 6, and it came out to 75 minutes, almost twice as long as from cone 6 to cone 8!

 

The at a rate of climb of 108F/hr, which is what my firings use, the difference between cone 6 and cone 8 is only 48 degrees. The difference between cone 4 and cone 6 is 108 degrees. So can we assume that the greater the temperature gap, the longer the soak time in order to achieve the heat work? Those of you who soak for cones, what cones are you using, and how long is your soak time?


Neil Estrick
Kiln Repair Tech
L&L Distributor
Owner, Neil Estrick Gallery, LLC
www.neilestrickgallery.com

neil@neilestrickgallery.com

#2 Chris Campbell

Chris Campbell

    clay stained since 1988

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,153 posts
  • LocationRaleigh, NC

Posted 08 November 2013 - 11:05 AM

If you can get the NCECA program for last year you can read a great presentation on the newest research on Heatwork. Basically the future of kiln programming will have to go to Heatwork rather than Cones ... it's their fault for giving us computers to play with!

Anyhow, my fabled firing of this week ... I ramped the computer to hit 2200F, held it for 20 minutes. Results - cone 7 on top, hard 8 in the middle and a regular 8 at the bottom. The controlled cooling did not go all the way, so I lost some of that Heatwork. Brand new elements on first high firing.

Chris Campbell
Contemporary Fine Colored Porcelain
http://www.ccpottery.com/

https://www.facebook...88317932?ref=hl

TRY ...   FAIL ...  LEARN ...  REPEAT


#3 JBaymore

JBaymore

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 2,902 posts
  • LocationWilton, NH USA

Posted 08 November 2013 - 11:08 AM

If you can get the NCECA program for last year you can read a great presentation on the newest research on Heatwork. Basically the future of kiln programming will have to go to Heatwork rather than Cones ... it's their fault for giving us computers to play with!

 

What she said!  Chris and I sat side by side for this presentation and it was FANTASTIC. 

 

I was refering to this same presentation in another posting on this subject elsewhere where I said that the programming of kiln controllers will be changing soon based upon this research.

 

best,

 

.........................john


John Baymore
Immediate Past President; Potters Council
Professor of Ceramics; New Hampshire Insitute of Art

http://www.JohnBaymore.com

#4 Diane Puckett

Diane Puckett

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 398 posts
  • LocationAsheville, NC

Posted 08 November 2013 - 11:50 AM

I will have to see if I can find a video of that presentation. In trying to solve glaze problems, I have wondered if it is not just heat work but also temperature reached which may cause/solve glaze problems. I would think the glaze effects of reaching the heat work of cone 8 by firing to 6 with a long hold is not the same as firing to 8 with no hold.

I hope that makes sense. With electronic controllers we almost need some new words to make things clearer.
Diane Puckett
Dry Ridge Pottery

#5 JBaymore

JBaymore

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 2,902 posts
  • LocationWilton, NH USA

Posted 08 November 2013 - 12:31 PM

Here is the NCECA Journal in which the article would be:

 

https://netforum.ave...e0-8ae6d16a5052

 

best,

 

.......................john

 

PS:  I have to go look at (find) my copy to see how extensive the piece is. 


John Baymore
Immediate Past President; Potters Council
Professor of Ceramics; New Hampshire Insitute of Art

http://www.JohnBaymore.com

#6 Chris Campbell

Chris Campbell

    clay stained since 1988

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,153 posts
  • LocationRaleigh, NC

Posted 08 November 2013 - 12:32 PM

You are exactly right Diane ... Cones are a really outdated way of trying to measure what is happening inside your kiln if you are doing anything other than a straight forward Cone firing.

As I remember, the talk was presented by Orton, Skutt and the scientist involved, so I think we should see progress towards a new kind of language and numbering system that will stand for heatwork achieved, rather than cone temps. Then we won't have to fire by guess work and the parameters that change with the age of your elements, the size of your kiln load etc.

I too am trying to find my copy ....


Chris Campbell
Contemporary Fine Colored Porcelain
http://www.ccpottery.com/

https://www.facebook...88317932?ref=hl

TRY ...   FAIL ...  LEARN ...  REPEAT


#7 neilestrick

neilestrick

    Neil Estrick

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,522 posts
  • LocationGrayslake, IL

Posted 08 November 2013 - 12:54 PM

I can see this all getting very complicated for beginners in the near future, what with so many Kiln Sitters still in use. Should be fun!


Neil Estrick
Kiln Repair Tech
L&L Distributor
Owner, Neil Estrick Gallery, LLC
www.neilestrickgallery.com

neil@neilestrickgallery.com

#8 docweathers

docweathers

    Gismo Guy

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 400 posts
  • LocationSpokane Wa

Posted 08 November 2013 - 03:11 PM

Who was the author/presenter of the Heat Work Presentation

 

Here is the NCECA Journal in which the article would be:

 

https://netforum.ave...e0-8ae6d16a5052

 

best,

 

.......................john

 

PS:  I have to go look at (find) my copy to see how extensive the piece is. 


Larry

Lawrence Weathers

Gismo Guy

Welded Sculpture
Pottery
Spokane WA


#9 Mart

Mart

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 282 posts

Posted 08 November 2013 - 04:53 PM

yawn... this is one of those "I told you so" (about cones and how outdated/limited this concept actually is)...
Lets use rings, forget the cones! LOL ;)

#10 Bob Coyle

Bob Coyle

    GEEZER

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 358 posts
  • LocationSanta Fe

Posted 08 November 2013 - 07:32 PM

 

Lets use rings, forget the cones

As an old organic chemist ... just make sure it is six member rings although I still like tetrahedrons

 

seriously though, I would be great to really get the true story on what “heat work” really means.



#11 Mart

Mart

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 282 posts

Posted 09 November 2013 - 07:30 AM

I can see this all getting very complicated for beginners in the near future, what with so many Kiln Sitters still in use. Should be fun!

 
Why? Laws of physics or chemistry have not changed in our universe. New theories do not change how nor why event X happens. It only changes how we describe/understand that event. It still keeps happening as it did before, if conditions (like temperature) are right. Ceramics have been fired by smell and sight and gut feeling for a very-very long time before Josiah Wedgwood created accurately scaled pyrometric beads (1782).
 
Even if the chemical composition and behavior of cones tetrahedrons (marketing department did not like that word) is going to change and they get renumbered (has happened before) we adjust to the new measuring stick and march on.
 
Certain changes in claybody or glazes happen because certain temperatures are reached. One can run circles a round a greenware pot with a candle - it will never bisque or turn in to a stoneware.

For example, quartz inversion occurs at 573°C. Period. You can call that point a Cube Y, The 6 Ding-Dongs or 846.15 K, it still happens when required condition (temperature in this case) is met.
 
My point is, as long as you can repeat what you did and confirm somehow (colour, cone, laser beam, thermocouple/voltmeter etc) required temperatures are reached, you are fine.

#12 Chris Campbell

Chris Campbell

    clay stained since 1988

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,153 posts
  • LocationRaleigh, NC

Posted 09 November 2013 - 08:26 AM

"My point is, as long as you can repeat what you did and confirm somehow (colour, cone, laser beam, thermocouple/voltmeter etc) required temperatures are reached, you are fine."

 

That is 100% true ... but no system of measurement is in place right now for people who manipulate their firings with the computer controls.

We take a shot in the dark at how long to hold at the end of the firing to hit a certain level of Heatwork ... then try to factor in the extra heat when we fire down. It was really good to hear they are working on it.


Chris Campbell
Contemporary Fine Colored Porcelain
http://www.ccpottery.com/

https://www.facebook...88317932?ref=hl

TRY ...   FAIL ...  LEARN ...  REPEAT


#13 neilestrick

neilestrick

    Neil Estrick

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,522 posts
  • LocationGrayslake, IL

Posted 09 November 2013 - 09:24 AM

 

I can see this all getting very complicated for beginners in the near future, what with so many Kiln Sitters still in use. Should be fun!

 
Why? Laws of physics or chemistry have not changed in our universe. New theories do not change how nor why event X happens. It only changes how we describe/understand that event. 

 

It could become confusing for beginners if we end up with two different systems- one for folks with Kiln Sitters and one for folks with digital controllers. One system seems to be confusing enough for some people. I'm not saying we shouldn't pursue it, I'm just saying it's going to be tough to educate everyone on two systems.


Neil Estrick
Kiln Repair Tech
L&L Distributor
Owner, Neil Estrick Gallery, LLC
www.neilestrickgallery.com

neil@neilestrickgallery.com

#14 JBaymore

JBaymore

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 2,902 posts
  • LocationWilton, NH USA

Posted 09 November 2013 - 10:48 AM

 

Because of the intrinsic properties of thermocouples, caution must be employed in relying on these devices to successfully control a firing process. A model for heatwork based on time-temperature information is discussed and the implications on potential under- and over-firing are examined.

 

 

THIS is the core of what I have been refering to. 

 

It is the current MODEL that is used in computerized controllers that will likely be changing... not the concept of the way cones behave nor the whole basis for the concept of heatwork.  Potential change is coming from a better understanding of what "heatwork" is all about.  Some things about ceramic process ar dependent not solely on the temperature achieved,... but also on application of heat over time... as it always has been. 

 

The focus of the "big stuff" in the talk was the better understanding of the relationships of heat energy applied over time during the upper portion of the firing process for any given end point cone range.

 

And as Chris and I discussed at the time in the lecture hall,... the presentation was likely "over the heads" of probably 90% of the people in the room.  As soon as the calculus slides went onto the screen............... you could "feel" people tuning out; many got up and left.  And that was the real meat in this presentation.

 

In the end what this will mean is simply more accurate modeling of firing behaviors for people who use controllers, and thefore more of the variables under a bit more control, and therefore more consistent results.

 

best,

 

.......................john


John Baymore
Immediate Past President; Potters Council
Professor of Ceramics; New Hampshire Insitute of Art

http://www.JohnBaymore.com

#15 Chris Campbell

Chris Campbell

    clay stained since 1988

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,153 posts
  • LocationRaleigh, NC

Posted 09 November 2013 - 11:49 AM

Well, I was totally lost at first John, but once they started showing picture graphs of what they were talking about it started to make total sense. Sadly people did leave before they had a chance to see the future these people are working on.
Unfortunately NCECA is sometimes like that ... a lecture that starts off boring either stays that way for an hour ... Or takes off.

Chris Campbell
Contemporary Fine Colored Porcelain
http://www.ccpottery.com/

https://www.facebook...88317932?ref=hl

TRY ...   FAIL ...  LEARN ...  REPEAT


#16 Bob Coyle

Bob Coyle

    GEEZER

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 358 posts
  • LocationSanta Fe

Posted 09 November 2013 - 12:24 PM

 

the presentation was likely "over the heads" of probably 90% of the people in the room. As soon as the calculus slides went onto the screen.

 

I'd like to see that John

 

I was thinking of writing a computer program that calculated total “heat work” for a particular ramp.

The simplest thing would be just to sum degree hours over the significant part of the run. The question being, what is significant in heat work. Is it the last few hundred degrees or should you start form quartz inversion?

 

This doesn't seem right either because there seems to be a significant difference between holds and ramps before reaching max temperature and holds and descending ramps after for each different glaze.

 

The main thing I would be looking for is whether this information would give you any more of an idea of how you might proceed than cones or peep hole fire color or

any of the other things mentioned.



#17 Wyndham

Wyndham

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 401 posts
  • LocationSeagrove NC

Posted 09 November 2013 - 12:57 PM

As I see it, there are other area's that are not viewed in the heat work discussion, body mass and glaze thickness as well as the lifespan of thermocouples and elements.

I think the issue is accepting the wide range of possibilities and learning by experience the how's and why's of firing. It can not be reduced to a firing schedule where others have taken the responsibility (by way of program firing) instead of the individual putting in the years of work to learn.

The fluxes in one clay body vs another with change the results of heat work on one clay body vs another. These issues will alway demand that the potter be more in control than the program. .

Just another 2 cents in the pot.

Wyndham



#18 docweathers

docweathers

    Gismo Guy

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 400 posts
  • LocationSpokane Wa

Posted 09 November 2013 - 04:28 PM

I understand the concept of heat work. What I don't understand is what's the merit of soaking for an extended period of time to reach a certain cone as opposed to just raising the kiln to that temperature more quickly. Given that there are merits of this  approach, how far can you push it and why? I know that Stephen Hill's firing schedules make a lot of use of soaking.

 

I know that I can test all the stuff for 10 years but at 69, I need more of a shortcut


Larry

Lawrence Weathers

Gismo Guy

Welded Sculpture
Pottery
Spokane WA


#19 Mart

Mart

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 282 posts

Posted 09 November 2013 - 04:57 PM

... The fluxes in one clay body vs another with change the results of heat work on one clay body vs another. These issues will alway demand that the potter be more in control than the program. .
Just another 2 cents in the pot.
Wyndham


Exactly and those events are far from random or require magic. Everything that happens, in any material we work with, can be defined by temperature and time. The question is, how can one measure this temperature and do it reliably - repeat it over and over again.
For example, me yard stick is temperature and time, numbers on the controller screen. It's just a value, like those eyeballed degrees of bent cones, you can barely see in raging inferno from that tiny peephole of your kiln.

If you change the clay body and are sharp enough, to figure out how change the firing schedule on fist try, you deserve fine result. Rest of us/them, must fail few times and only then, hopefully, adjust the schedule accordingly to succeed.

I highly recommended this brutal experiment - pull all the modern gadgets from your kiln and fire it "blind", fully loaded with your best work. Use your eyes, nose and gut feeling, see what happens. Find out, are you really fit for the job or not.

#20 neilestrick

neilestrick

    Neil Estrick

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,522 posts
  • LocationGrayslake, IL

Posted 09 November 2013 - 05:34 PM

I highly recommended this brutal experiment - pull all the modern gadgets from your kiln and fire it "blind", fully loaded with your best work. Use your eyes, nose and gut feeling, see what happens. Find out, are you really fit for the job or not. 

 

I used to do that with the wood kiln, and sometimes with the gas kiln, but it's nearly impossible to see what's happening in my electric kiln. The peeps are tiny! I get your point, though. But I don't necessarily think going 'pure' is really a judge of firing skill. By that argument we should do away with all tools, and handbuild everything and fire it in pits. There's nothing wrong with modern gadgets if you understand what they are doing, and not just blindly trusting/using them. I don't turn off spell check even though I don't need it...


Neil Estrick
Kiln Repair Tech
L&L Distributor
Owner, Neil Estrick Gallery, LLC
www.neilestrickgallery.com

neil@neilestrickgallery.com




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users