![]() It's virtually impossible a part of the "experienced mass" doesn't come from the base.īut I have learned to NOT overthink a lot of things, as I tend to do that (a couple good whisky's usually fix that problem ) . You'll be amazed how "heavy" the tiny anvils feels. Take a sledgehammer head weld a square spike on it go outside and beat it in a stump of wood preferably still with roots. ĭo the experiment of the stump anvil and you'll be amazed. Hence forth power hammer anvils' mass are between 1/5 to 1/20. They also found that the fixing method of the anvil to the frame mattered in noise, but not in deformation. Below 1/20 it was usefull to get a bigger anvil. They experimentally measured this and found that from a 1/20 ratio between hammer/anvil the increases in mass of the anvil didn't really increase deformation proportionally. I found an article about it once someone tried to find out how to mathematically find out how heavy an anvil had to be to be "optimal" for a power hammer, in this article they described resonance, vibration and plastic deformation of the workpiece. This is also why a steel tripod with a really strong fixation works so well. I think - and take this with a grain of salt - that the harder you fix your anvil down, in combination with the reduction in resonance-difference between anvil and foot the more energy will be reflected into the deformation of your work. The other one doesn't vibrate in your shoes You feel the hit in your feet through the concrete. The one where I glued the wood stump also to the concrete with the same glue it feels "heavier" under the hammer. Would a 66# anvil epoxied to a 66# box of sand work like a 132# anvil on a stool? Joey's tiny anvil was moving around under the clamps with each hit-A small anvil might "work" for a short job, but people really seem to think the big ones are worth it. Setting it in a bed of sandy dirt on the ground didn't seem to do too much to the ring. I also clamped the base to a flimsy bit of 3/8" plywood with some wood clamps, and that also quiets the ring somewhat. I can quench the ringing with a magnet, gripping a horn in a fist, clamp, a plumbing T, or jamming a chunk of 2x4 over it. Geeking out like an engineer, I worked out the natural frequency of a similarly-sized steel beam ( ) and it doesn't seem too far off from the tone. Resonance-wise, I have a shiny #66 Acciao anvil and it rings brightly. Did epoxying make any other difference than the ring? Epoxy deadened your ring, but you have the same mass. An alternative was to tap a thread on one of the bolted parts and dispense with the nut.Yeah, I was thinking about the way that "mass", "resonance", and "working" are different issues. Bolted joints are undesirable if the bolt is secured with a nut. Screwing and bolting were used in the 19th century. Such a joint was used on some early andirons. There were various ways of pinning pieces of iron together the type most frequently used resembled a mortise and tenon joint, with the tenon going completely through the mortise and held in place with a tapered wedge or pin of iron. ![]() Collaring was done by wrapping a band of iron around two pieces to join them together scrolls were frequently fastened to bars, or to each other, by this plan. When rivets with round heads were used, the portion hammered over, or riveted, was the same size and shape as the original head. ![]() When a countersunk-head was used, the head and the riveted end were flush with the surface of the iron, making them difficult to detect if the ironwork were heavily painted. ![]() Riveting used rivets with round or countersunk heads. Various methods were used by blacksmiths to join pieces of iron: riveting, collaring, pinning, screwing, and bolting. Its use, like the other techniques described, does not guarantee great age, but it does indicate that it was hand-wrought. ![]() At times, the enlarged portion was utilized to form part of the design of an object. Such holes usually have a burr on the bottom side, and the bar was always wider at the hole than at any other part. The bar was reheated the third time and the hole placed over an opening in the anvil, where it was stretched to the desired diameter with larger punches. The punch was pulled out of the bar, the bar reheated, and punched from the opposite side until there was a small hole through the bar. Then, after reheating, a small punch was forced through the hot part of the bar with a hammer, until the punch was stopped by the face of the anvil. The first operation was to heat the bar and slightly increase its width by upsetting. It was the only method known by which a hole one inch in diameter could be made in a bar one inch wide. Punching was quite simple, but very important for decorative purposes and for joining pieces of iron. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |