PDA

View Full Version : Good Burner for Smelting?



Old Ironsights
05-04-2006, 10:05 AM
Just got this email from Cabelas today:
http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/content/Item/51/06/87/i510687sq01.jpg
For smaller groups and families, this single-burner Standard Outdoor Cooker has a 54,000 BTU burner, a UL-listed hose and regulator with brass needle valves for fast and easy adjustment, and a compact table-top design (Legs not included). The large burner area allows you to use large pots and pans. This cooker is compact and stable so you can take it anywhere you go. It's perfect for weekend camping excursions or week-long hunting or fishing trips, and it's great to use as a backyard cooker.

$55.

Good price? Probably more than I need (I'm quite happy smelting pure lead in an 8" cast iron skillet) But seems like it is a heck of a lot easier to deal with/buy than a Plumber's smelter...

Dale53
05-04-2006, 10:15 AM
This type of unit is what I use and I am HAPPY with it. However, Bass Pro has a similar burner with a cast iron Dutch oven with it for that price (last time I looked).

The important thing to make sure that whatever you buy is sturdy enough to support a couple of hundred lbs of molten bullet metal. I HAVE seen some entirely too flimsy for our use. Both Cabelas and the Bass Pro unit appear to be plenty strong (can't tell for sure without looking at it).

Dale53

Johnch
05-04-2006, 04:14 PM
I found a burner that I feel will work well for the tinker .
I salvaged a propane hot water heater burner .
I beleive it is rated for 150,000 BTU , so I may put a reducing valve inline .
I am just starting to design the burner holder and base .
I will be using house line propane ( 500 gallon tank ), not 20 lb cylenders.

I got the idea from seeing a freinds that runs off natural gas from his house .

I also salvaged enough valves and quick conects to do the job .

Should make the next melt go faster :twisted: :twisted:

Johnch

Old Ironsights
05-04-2006, 04:25 PM
I found a burner that I feel will work well for the tinker .
I salvaged a propane hot water heater burner .
I beleive it is rated for 150,000 BTU ,

Should make the next melt go faster :twisted: :twisted:

Johnch
Jeez. No doubt. :drinks:

felix
05-04-2006, 04:26 PM
No, keep it at 150K BTU, and then you can run it at 75K using natural gas (methane) should that become necessary. Methane has one half of the energy of propane. If that unit you have is rated at 150K using methane, then it would be 300K using propane. Regulate heat by gas and air valves. You should have both installed. ... felix

44woody
05-04-2006, 06:59 PM
I have one just like it I got from wal-mart I get side work from a bullet maker here in town and I do his smelting for him I do about 800 to 1000 pounds of lead at a time for him I average about 125 pounds a hour with mine it takes 7 or 8 hr to go threw all the ww that he gives me :castmine: 44Woody

bobthenailer
05-07-2006, 07:00 AM
i have the same cabales burner , works perfect, as a bonus it sits lower than most, less chance of tipping over thats why i bought it! you can up grade it to higher btu or natural gas as i contacted the manufacture about this option bob

largecaliberman
05-08-2006, 02:35 PM
Johnch,
Great idea. I just so happen to see a bunch of old gas water heaters at a rubbish dump. Just remember though, the best temperature to smelt lead is to get at at the minimum temperature otherwise you might end up melting zinc weights if you're doing WW.[smilie=1:

Char-Gar
05-08-2006, 02:51 PM
What do you guys use for a ladle to remove the molten lead from the cooker and put it in ingot molds. I need something cheap.

Edward429451
05-08-2006, 04:13 PM
Unless your water heater was a huge commercial unit, or a burner from a tankless unit, no way is it 150K btu's. 38K to 50K tops.

I've used burners from old coal to gas conversion furnaces and it worked good. An older style Steel? milk crate flipped over and notched for the gas line, will support at least 100 lbs of lead.

Dippers? Lyman or RCBS for the least fuss 14(ish) dollars. Barring that, I'd go dig through the thrift stores for a suitable ladle. (You'll know it when you see it) I got a couple that way. Aluminum, but good for pouring ingots.

Ron
05-09-2006, 03:44 AM
Chargar,
I use a cheap, AUD$5.00,stainless steel soup ladle which I bought grom a cheap hardware store. Half filled it fills an RCBS ingot mould.


Ron.



FESTINA LENTE

Four Fingers of Death
05-09-2006, 04:45 AM
I have one of those old two burner Coleman petrol stoves. I have used a smaller one for years, but only for cooking on, not for long periods. How do these go when you keep them burning for protracted periods. Have to keep pumping them I suppose.

wcb_gabe
05-21-2006, 04:21 AM
Felix and Sundog,
Are you still looking to get sell the moas? Where are you guys located? I'm looking for another smelter and I think yours might be big eneough.
Best Regards, Gabe

sundog
05-21-2006, 08:26 AM
Gabe, 25 miles SE of Tulsa. sundog

HTRN
05-23-2006, 09:33 AM
While currently forced to use a 100lb electric pot to smelt at the moment($%^@ thing doesn't even bottom pour! Well, can't fault the price - free;) ), I am planning for the future - While MOAS is an impressive bit of engineering for off the shelf resources, Sundog has mentioned some faults with it, mainly the long heat time. That's due to the amount of lead, vs. the amount of heat available.

My solution is simple - buld a new burner, and use a bigger tank and higher pressure. The idea is with a larger cylinder or even multiple cylinders, you have much higher natural vaporization rate, and using a fuel gas regulator instead of turkey cooker reg, I can much higher in terms of pressure - 50PSI vs. 20 or less(You don't want to go any higher than 50 psi with propane). using a "fork" type venturi burner (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v516/HTRN/Machine%20Shop/Forkburner.jpg), and a low wide "pot" for better heat transfer(a tall narrow pot will have less surface area on the bottom, so the burner would have to be smaller), I figure I can improve the melt time signifcantly.

Sundog, you might actually be working at the outer limits of the vaporization rate of the size cylinder you're using? Have you noticed the cylinder getting either frost, or just extremely cold? If you have, it's because the tank is sucking up all the ambient heat to convert liquid propane into gas. Coupla ways around that - either provide more heat to the tank(Like an rubbermaid box filled with hot water, or using a bigger tank.


HTRN

sundog
05-23-2006, 09:51 AM
Yes, the heat source should be reengineered because of the size of the pot. And the pot, like any vessel doing this kind of work, is kinda like a heat sink, drawing off heat as you continue to put it in. The solution to that is some kind of insulation on the outside of the pot. Both of these improvements are relatively easy and inexpensive for someone who has a need for a pot this size.

With the smaller pots that many of us use, we can put enough heat on it to make it work well, e.g., a 6- or 8-qt cast dutch oven or a 50 cal ammo can on a turkey cooker. But, we are also wasting ALOT of the heat. Suppose you could capture that heat? Or insulate the pot so less heat needed to be thrown at it. In that small an application, it's hardly worth messing with, simply turn up the heat a little and you're there, because you still have capacity.

After using the MOAS for several batches it is obvious that the design is correct, but heat source and insulation would be two easy, low cost improvements, that would increase efficiency several fold. If someone could figure a spigot system to empty the melt, that would also be nice, but not necessary. Felix and I did not do this out of safety concerns on out part, but it could be done easily enough and could be safe. sundog

felix
05-23-2006, 10:10 AM
Safety is the primary concern with something like the MOAS. Cannot afford just even a hint of a problem. 2000 pounds of lead can easily be a river of death, melted or not! ... felix

Old Ironsights
05-23-2006, 10:42 AM
Most relaxing day in months. 4 hours and 36lbs of old Church Roof turned into shiny little ingots.

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y180/MrMisanthrope/IMG_4532.jpghttp://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y180/MrMisanthrope/IMG_4535.jpg
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y180/MrMisanthrope/IMG_4536.jpghttp://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y180/MrMisanthrope/IMG_4534.jpg

Only 60lbs to go before I order some more...

robertbank
05-23-2006, 03:25 PM
Hi

I have used my Coleman two burner for smelting WW for years now. No worries, works fine. I use a cast iron pot and do about 10 lbs at a time then reload the pot and do all over again. Did 100# at a sitting with no problems.

Take Care

HTRN
05-23-2006, 04:32 PM
Yes, the heat source should be reengineered because of the size of the pot. And the pot, like any vessel doing this kind of work, is kinda like a heat sink, drawing off heat as you continue to put it in. The solution to that is some kind of insulation on the outside of the pot. Both of these improvements are relatively easy and inexpensive for someone who has a need for a pot this size.

You know the old say, "Good artists borrow, great artists steal"? I think either Kaolwool or a high temp refactory cast around it, and a Tuliere' would seriously improve heat times, along with a purpose built burner. What it would mean is you wouldn't be able to use weed torches anymore as the whole shebang will be insulated except from the bottom.

What you could try is this: get a bunch of those el cheapo turkey cookers(4 should do nicely) and strip the burner assembly out of them. plumb them into a manifold off of a fuel gas regulator, with individual ball valves for each line. Make up a framework for the whole shebang to hang under the pot. For this you're definitely going to need a 100lb LP tank, maybe even a pair of them with a fuel gas reg on each(Each reg would then feed two burners instead of 4).

Not the cheapest solution, or the best, but it can all be done in an afternoon, and all the components with the exception of the regs are locally available.


HTRN