Sullivan on wed 21 jul 99
Hello!
I have started working in a new studio and may change clay, so.. I am
looking for cone 8 glazes for an electric kiln, I'll be using Highwater's
P-10 porcelain. Any help would be great!!
Thanks, Martha
Martha Sullivan
SOL Pottery
Studio and Gallery located at
1750 Moore Road
Floyd, VA 24091
Chris Schafale on sun 16 apr 00
I'm intrigued by this cone 8 discussion as well. Anyone care to
share a recipe or two? Maybe a matt and a gloss?
Chris
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Ron,
>
> Thanks for replying. I was also thinking about cone 8, and
> after trading some email with Ray Aldridge I think I'm sold.
> My plan is to start with the flux ratios of some glazes that
> I think are close to what I am after and perform some Ian
> Currie style blends varying alumina and silica.
>
> Now that I'm paying attention I've noticed many english
> potters fire cone 8 ox. Not sure about my local Tipperary
> potters yet - they're a more secretive bunch. :)
>
> In your cone 8 teachings how much boron did you use? It seems
> like a necessary flux at cone 6 but optional at cone 8.
>
> I hope to take a workshop from you one of these days... are you
> planning any trips to the UK?
>
> -- Ken
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ron Roy"
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 1:24 PM
> Subject: Re: Cone 6 vs. Cone 9 ox
>
>
> > ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> > Hi Ken,
> >
> > It is easier to make glazes with "body" at cone 9 because the feldspars are
> > melting well at that temperature. You can also get more silica and alumina
> > in higher fired glazes - this helps make better glass as well.
> >
> > Colour seems to drop off above cone 6 - at least with the brighter colours
> > - or should I say harder to keep bright.
> >
> > I taught for years at cone 8 - which I thought was a good compromise for
> > electric firing. Glazes can be more stable and clay has a better range than
> > at 6.
> >
> > The key here is how much flux you have to add - at any temperature - to get
> > clays and glazes to melt. The less flux the better the range - simply
> > because the melting can proceed slower with less flux.
> >
> > RR
> >
> > >----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> > >I learned how to make pots in "Mingeisotta", hence in the past I've
> > >fired the bulk of my work at cone 10 reduction. For the next 2-3
> > >years however I will be using an electric kiln, and I'm about to
> > >launch into developing new glazes for my functional stoneware.
> > >
> > >To my eye and hand, cone 9 glazes seem more appealing that cone 6;
> > >they seem softer and have more character. And so I wonder, is
> > >this a property of cone 9 fluxes that just can't be duplicated?
> > >Or is it usually possible, using glaze calculation and experiments,
> > >to tweak the recipe and obtain similar results at cone 6?
> > >
> > >And just how hard on the elements is cone 9?
> > >
> > >-- Ken
> > >In sunny Ireland (at least today...)
> >
> > Ron Roy
> > 93 Pegasus Trail
> > Scarborough
> > Ontario, Canada
> > M1G 3N8
> > Evenings 416-439-2621
> > Fax 416-438-7849
> >
>
Light One Candle Pottery
Fuquay-Varina, North Carolina, USA
(south of Raleigh)
candle@intrex.net
http://www.lightonecandle.com
Sheron Roberts on mon 17 apr 00
------------------
Chris,
I have fired the Kemp 17,
from the Clayart Archives,
to cone 10 and to cone 8.
Using white stoneware,
Phoenix from Highwater,
the pots came out almost
the same. The difference
was, cone 8 gave me
more red in the glaze.
I had no problem with
pinholes, bubbles or crazing
at either cone. Cone 8
was just prettier. Also
at cone 8, there were
milky blue, almost opalescent
pooling where the glaze was
thickest. Also, I should add,
I use an electric kiln.
Sheron in NC
Ray Aldridge on mon 17 apr 00
At 06:07 PM 4/16/00 EDT, you wrote:
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>I'm intrigued by this cone 8 discussion as well. Anyone care to
>share a recipe or two? Maybe a matt and a gloss?
>
Can't help with the matte, but here's a Cone 8 oxidation gloss I've been
working with lately:
G-200 44
Flint (Quartz) 21
Wollastonite 22
EPK 13
This is a reproduction of the ideal Chinese lime-alkali glaze discussed in
Nigel Wood's _Oriental Glazes_. It's generally used as a celadon with
added iron, or as in this version, as a porcelain glaze. It's a rich hard
flawless gloss, much nicer to my eye than glosses using boron, and doesn't
craze over the porcelain I use.
Ray
Aldridge Porcelain and Stoneware
http://www.goodpots.com
Garry Dick on tue 18 apr 00
Hi!!
I am a "surfacing" lurker....at last I have something to contribute!!!.
I have some (ancient) ^8 glazes I gleaned from a neighbourhood night course
in Toronto some 30 years ago; from a great guy named Michael Davis. These
are originally Centennial College glazes - Ron Roy will recognize them. (Hi
Ron!!)
I began potting back then....then got transferred out of the country, and did
nothing till I took early retirement three years ago. Now I'm a cerami arts
(i think that's pottery...) student at Florida Atlantic University over the
spring semester; and setting up a studio in Toronto area in the summers....
The two glazes I liked best - assuming my memory isn't tricking me - and
reasons why - follow:
stony white - a white matt
F4 spar............60
dolomite...........30
zinc oxide......... 5
ball clay.............8
tin oxide.............4
....ok, so it doesn't add up to 100....we can deal with that....this glaze
also works very well at ^6. It interracts nicely with oxides - especially
copper, as I recall, and has a nice matt to semi-matt texture.
Pattison Oatmeal
F4 spar....................55.0
dolomite...................15.0
zinc oxide................. 3.5
whiting..................... 10.0
G. B. ........................ 3.5
EPK ........................21.0
Silica..........................9.0
tin oxide..................... 4.0
R.I.O. .........................2.0
rutile...........................2.0
gran. Ilmenite ..............0.3
This has nice spotting and texture, reminiscent of reduction glazes...call it
a "slightly dry semi matt". I don't know....looking at the ingredients, I
might even guess Ron Roy had a hand in formulating this one! (???!?)
cheers,
Garry Dick, in sunny south Florida
Cantello Studios on tue 18 apr 00
Hi all I love this cone 8 thought . I have been thinking of dropping all my
cone 10 glazes down to 8.
The big thing is time, I feel that you could get all the colors. Right now I
fire to cone 10
but it's more like 11. I would like to fire to 8\9 . Right now when I get to
cone 9 from there to 11 is all
speed and fire neutral flame and all. It seems like a waste of gas and time,
I guess you can say that's where
the glaze fines out. Most potters would say that anyway. The thing is it
takes me about 10 and 1\2hr. to reach
cone 9 and another hour or more to reach 11 , what I'm getting at is if the
glaze is not fined out in 10 hr.
It's a bad glaze anyway. It seem to me that if I could knock off two hours
at the end of my firing I could save
1\3 to 1\2 the cost of each firing. Am I right to think this?
Chris in CA where the garden just got a major soaking.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ceramic Arts Discussion List [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.UKY.EDU]On Behalf
Of Chris Schafale
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2000 3:07 PM
To: CLAYART@LSV.UKY.EDU
Subject: Cone 8 glazes
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
I'm intrigued by this cone 8 discussion as well. Anyone care to
share a recipe or two? Maybe a matt and a gloss?
Chris
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Ron,
>
> Thanks for replying. I was also thinking about cone 8, and
> after trading some email with Ray Aldridge I think I'm sold.
> My plan is to start with the flux ratios of some glazes that
> I think are close to what I am after and perform some Ian
> Currie style blends varying alumina and silica.
>
> Now that I'm paying attention I've noticed many english
> potters fire cone 8 ox. Not sure about my local Tipperary
> potters yet - they're a more secretive bunch. :)
>
> In your cone 8 teachings how much boron did you use? It seems
> like a necessary flux at cone 6 but optional at cone 8.
>
> I hope to take a workshop from you one of these days... are you
> planning any trips to the UK?
>
> -- Ken
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ron Roy"
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 1:24 PM
> Subject: Re: Cone 6 vs. Cone 9 ox
>
>
> > ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> > Hi Ken,
> >
> > It is easier to make glazes with "body" at cone 9 because the feldspars
are
> > melting well at that temperature. You can also get more silica and
alumina
> > in higher fired glazes - this helps make better glass as well.
> >
> > Colour seems to drop off above cone 6 - at least with the brighter
colours
> > - or should I say harder to keep bright.
> >
> > I taught for years at cone 8 - which I thought was a good compromise for
> > electric firing. Glazes can be more stable and clay has a better range
than
> > at 6.
> >
> > The key here is how much flux you have to add - at any temperature - to
get
> > clays and glazes to melt. The less flux the better the range - simply
> > because the melting can proceed slower with less flux.
> >
> > RR
> >
> > >----------------------------Original
message----------------------------
> > >I learned how to make pots in "Mingeisotta", hence in the past I've
> > >fired the bulk of my work at cone 10 reduction. For the next 2-3
> > >years however I will be using an electric kiln, and I'm about to
> > >launch into developing new glazes for my functional stoneware.
> > >
> > >To my eye and hand, cone 9 glazes seem more appealing that cone 6;
> > >they seem softer and have more character. And so I wonder, is
> > >this a property of cone 9 fluxes that just can't be duplicated?
> > >Or is it usually possible, using glaze calculation and experiments,
> > >to tweak the recipe and obtain similar results at cone 6?
> > >
> > >And just how hard on the elements is cone 9?
> > >
> > >-- Ken
> > >In sunny Ireland (at least today...)
> >
> > Ron Roy
> > 93 Pegasus Trail
> > Scarborough
> > Ontario, Canada
> > M1G 3N8
> > Evenings 416-439-2621
> > Fax 416-438-7849
> >
>
Light One Candle Pottery
Fuquay-Varina, North Carolina, USA
(south of Raleigh)
candle@intrex.net
http://www.lightonecandle.com
Jeff Lawrence on tue 18 apr 00
Ray Aldridge reported on a cone 8 oxidation glaze he concocted:
G-200 44
Flint (Quartz) 21
Wollastonite 22
EPK 13
This is a reproduction of the ideal Chinese lime-alkali glaze discussed in
Nigel Wood's _Oriental Glazes_. It's generally used as a celadon with
added iron, or as in this version, as a porcelain glaze. It's a rich hard
flawless gloss, much nicer to my eye than glosses using boron, and doesn't
craze over the porcelain I use.
Hi Ray and other technically astute clayartists,
THere are some liquid-liquid phase separation effects described on 120-124
of WOod's book that are intriguing me but which I don't understand well.
The key sentences are:
"... a graph that plots RO2 (SiO2+TiO2) agains R2O3 (Al2O3+Fe2O3+P2O3). All
the important Chinese glazes that show liquid liquid phase separation tend
to be found scattered about a line that represents RO2 and R2O3 in a
molecular ratio of 10.7:1 (in real weights this is RO2:R2O3 in 6.3:1
proportions)."
I want to interpret this as a glaze with a Si:Al ratio of 10.71, but I'm
suspicious that this is too easy. Can anyone help me parse the above?
TIA
Jeff Lawrence ph. 505-753-5913
Sun Dagger Design fx. 505-753-8074
18496 US HWY 285/84 jml@sundagger.com
Espanola, NM 87532 www.sundagger.com
Aldridge Porcelain and Stoneware
http://www.goodpots.com
Michael Banks on wed 19 apr 00
Because the ingredients in the recipe are mostly iron, titanium and
phosphorous free, the RO2/R2O3 ratio is simply the molar silica/alumina
ratio in this case. I get 8.5 to 1 for this glaze (using Insight ver
4.1 -for DOS!) Jeff.
Michael,
Nelson,
NZ
From: Jeff Lawrence wrote:
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Ray Aldridge reported on a cone 8 oxidation glaze he concocted:
> G-200 44
> Flint (Quartz) 21
> Wollastonite 22
> EPK 13
>
> This is a reproduction of the ideal Chinese lime-alkali glaze discussed in
> Nigel Wood's _Oriental Glazes_. It's generally used as a celadon with
> added iron, or as in this version, as a porcelain glaze. It's a rich hard
> flawless gloss, much nicer to my eye than glosses using boron, and doesn't
> craze over the porcelain I use.
>
> Hi Ray and other technically astute clayartists,
>
> THere are some liquid-liquid phase separation effects described on 120-124
> of WOod's book that are intriguing me but which I don't understand well.
>
> The key sentences are:
> "... a graph that plots RO2 (SiO2+TiO2) agains R2O3 (Al2O3+Fe2O3+P2O3).
All
> the important Chinese glazes that show liquid liquid phase separation tend
> to be found scattered about a line that represents RO2 and R2O3 in a
> molecular ratio of 10.7:1 (in real weights this is RO2:R2O3 in 6.3:1
> proportions)."
>
> I want to interpret this as a glaze with a Si:Al ratio of 10.71, but I'm
> suspicious that this is too easy. Can anyone help me parse the above?
>
> TIA
>
> Jeff Lawrence ph. 505-753-5913
> Sun Dagger Design fx. 505-753-8074
> 18496 US HWY 285/84 jml@sundagger.com
> Espanola, NM 87532 www.sundagger.com
> Aldridge Porcelain and Stoneware
> http://www.goodpots.com
>
David Hewitt on thu 20 apr 00
Jeff,
I find that Ian Currie's book 'Stoneware Glazes' very clearly shows the
value of looking at the Si/Al ratio for different glazes and firing
temperatures. Pages 173-8 deal with Celadon glazes and his charts may,
therefore, be of particular interest to you. From these a ratio of 8:1
would seem to more appropriate than 10:1, but as Michael Banks has
commented, the recipe you give does analyse out around 8:1. This chapter
in his book also deals with the all important Basic oxides that go with
the appropriate Si and Al to produce Celadons.
David
In message , Jeff Lawrence writes
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>Ray Aldridge reported on a cone 8 oxidation glaze he concocted:
>G-200 44
>Flint (Quartz) 21
>Wollastonite 22
>EPK 13
>
>This is a reproduction of the ideal Chinese lime-alkali glaze discussed in
>Nigel Wood's _Oriental Glazes_. It's generally used as a celadon with
>added iron, or as in this version, as a porcelain glaze. It's a rich hard
>flawless gloss, much nicer to my eye than glosses using boron, and doesn't
>craze over the porcelain I use.
>
>Hi Ray and other technically astute clayartists,
>
>THere are some liquid-liquid phase separation effects described on 120-124
>of WOod's book that are intriguing me but which I don't understand well.
>
>The key sentences are:
> "... a graph that plots RO2 (SiO2+TiO2) agains R2O3 (Al2O3+Fe2O3+P2O3). All
>the important Chinese glazes that show liquid liquid phase separation tend
>to be found scattered about a line that represents RO2 and R2O3 in a
>molecular ratio of 10.7:1 (in real weights this is RO2:R2O3 in 6.3:1
>proportions)."
>
>I want to interpret this as a glaze with a Si:Al ratio of 10.71, but I'm
>suspicious that this is too easy. Can anyone help me parse the above?
>
>TIA
>
>Jeff Lawrence ph. 505-753-5913
>Sun Dagger Design fx. 505-753-8074
>18496 US HWY 285/84 jml@sundagger.com
>Espanola, NM 87532 www.sundagger.com
>Aldridge Porcelain and Stoneware
>http://www.goodpots.com
>
--
David Hewitt
David Hewitt Pottery ,
7 Fairfield Road, Caerleon, Newport,
South Wales, NP18 3DQ, UK. Tel:- +44 (0) 1633 420647
FAX:- +44 (0) 870 1617274
Web site http://www.dhpot.demon.co.uk
Ray Aldridge on sat 22 apr 00
At 04:11 PM 4/20/00 EDT, you wrote:
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>Jeff,
>I find that Ian Currie's book 'Stoneware Glazes' very clearly shows the
>value of looking at the Si/Al ratio for different glazes and firing
>temperatures. Pages 173-8 deal with Celadon glazes and his charts may,
>therefore, be of particular interest to you. From these a ratio of 8:1
>would seem to more appropriate than 10:1, but as Michael Banks has
>commented, the recipe you give does analyse out around 8:1. This chapter
>in his book also deals with the all important Basic oxides that go with
>the appropriate Si and Al to produce Celadons.
>David
David, Michael and all-- I think Jeff just quoted the recipe I gave as a
lead-in to his question about phase separation glazes (by which I assume he
means Chuns). I don't think that my recipe actually had anything to do
with his question, except that it was developed from Nigel Wood's analyses
of classic lime-alkali glazes. It's definitely not a Chun type glaze,
which as most students of Chinese glazes know, generally seems to need
phosphorous for the flashy effects associated with Chuns. The passage he
quoted must be from Wood's latest book, because I don't remember seeing
anything like that in his 1978 _Oriental Glazes_.
Anyway, sorry to have been a source of confusion. In this case, at least,
I didn't mean to be.
Ray
>In message , Jeff Lawrence writes
>>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>>Ray Aldridge reported on a cone 8 oxidation glaze he concocted:
>>G-200 44
>>Flint (Quartz) 21
>>Wollastonite 22
>>EPK 13
>>
>
Aldridge Porcelain and Stoneware
http://www.goodpots.com
Jeff Lawrence on mon 24 apr 00
Hello,
Thanks everyone for the commentary. To someone with less of my chemistry
impairment, my question was certainly obvious. However, even though I asked
it poorly, Michael and David's assesment of Ray's glaze did answer my
question. To wit, whether, in the absence of significant TiO2, Fe2O3, or
P2O3, the RO2:R2O3 ratio as defined by WOod (where RO2=(SiO2+TiO2) and R2O3
= (Al2O3+Fe2O3+P2O3) is essentially the same as the Si:Al ratio provided by
my Insight. As I repeat it, I am embarrassed to have asked it...
WHat I should have asked was about other potential gotchas en route to
achieving glazes that create blue color by light scattering, rather than
oxide colorants. Such questions as,
"Are there any other RO2 or R2O3 skulksters (B2O3, maybe?) that I should
worry about that aren't cited here?"
"Where does calcia figure into the ideal Chun glaze?"
I secured a copy of a Kingery/Vandiver paper Wood cites on this point and am
in deep waters...
Jeff Lawrence ph. 505-753-5913
Sun Dagger Design fx. 505-753-8074
18496 US HWY 285/84 jml@sundagger.com
Espanola, NM 87532 www.sundagger.com
Ron Roy on mon 24 apr 00
Hi Gary,
You brought back memories galore - these glazes were developed mostly by my
students - I can't recommend them as durable but they are interesting.
Better test em - they were made with materials available 25 years ago.
RR
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>I am a "surfacing" lurker....at last I have something to contribute!!!.
>
> I have some (ancient) ^8 glazes I gleaned from a neighbourhood night course
>in Toronto some 30 years ago; from a great guy named Michael Davis. These
>are originally Centennial College glazes - Ron Roy will recognize them. (Hi
>Ron!!)
>
>I began potting back then....then got transferred out of the country, and did
>nothing till I took early retirement three years ago. Now I'm a cerami arts
>(i think that's pottery...) student at Florida Atlantic University over the
>spring semester; and setting up a studio in Toronto area in the summers....
>
>The two glazes I liked best - assuming my memory isn't tricking me - and
>reasons why - follow:
>
>stony white - a white matt
>
>F4 spar............60
>dolomite...........30
>zinc oxide......... 5
>ball clay.............8
>tin oxide.............4
>
>....ok, so it doesn't add up to 100....we can deal with that....this glaze
>also works very well at ^6. It interracts nicely with oxides - especially
>copper, as I recall, and has a nice matt to semi-matt texture.
>
>
>Pattison Oatmeal
>
>F4 spar....................55.0
>dolomite...................15.0
>zinc oxide................. 3.5
>whiting..................... 10.0
>G. B. ........................ 3.5
>EPK ........................21.0
>Silica..........................9.0
>tin oxide..................... 4.0
>R.I.O. .........................2.0
>rutile...........................2.0
>gran. Ilmenite ..............0.3
>
>This has nice spotting and texture, reminiscent of reduction glazes...call it
>a "slightly dry semi matt". I don't know....looking at the ingredients, I
>might even guess Ron Roy had a hand in formulating this one! (???!?)
>
>cheers,
> Garry Dick, in sunny south Florida
Ron Roy
93 Pegasus Trail
Scarborough
Ontario, Canada
M1G 3N8
Evenings 416-439-2621
Fax 416-438-7849
David Hewitt on wed 26 apr 00
Jeff,
As I mentioned in my earlier reply, Ian Currie's book 'Stoneware Glazes'
and his chapter on Celadon Glazes makes very interesting reading. For
example, I give the following extracts:-
....'The balance of fluxes, alumina and silica is critical in determining
the colour response of the iron oxide.'...
He then goes on to deal with three experiments with different fluxes,
Limestone base, Feldspathic base and Barium base.
...'Two important effects of moving from a limestone base to to a
Feldspathic one are that blues develop more easily, and it becomes more
difficult to eliminate crazing. In general the lower the alumina the
better the blue.'....
There is much more, but perhaps this may help you to judge if ti is
worth your while getting hold of this book.
David
In message , Jeff Lawrence writes
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>Hello,
>
>Thanks everyone for the commentary. To someone with less of my chemistry
>impairment, my question was certainly obvious. However, even though I asked
>it poorly, Michael and David's assesment of Ray's glaze did answer my
>question. To wit, whether, in the absence of significant TiO2, Fe2O3, or
>P2O3, the RO2:R2O3 ratio as defined by WOod (where RO2=(SiO2+TiO2) and R2O3
>= (Al2O3+Fe2O3+P2O3) is essentially the same as the Si:Al ratio provided by
>my Insight. As I repeat it, I am embarrassed to have asked it...
>
>WHat I should have asked was about other potential gotchas en route to
>achieving glazes that create blue color by light scattering, rather than
>oxide colorants. Such questions as,
>"Are there any other RO2 or R2O3 skulksters (B2O3, maybe?) that I should
>worry about that aren't cited here?"
>"Where does calcia figure into the ideal Chun glaze?"
>
>I secured a copy of a Kingery/Vandiver paper Wood cites on this point and am
>in deep waters...
>
>Jeff Lawrence ph. 505-753-5913
>Sun Dagger Design fx. 505-753-8074
>18496 US HWY 285/84 jml@sundagger.com
>Espanola, NM 87532 www.sundagger.com
>
--
David Hewitt
David Hewitt Pottery ,
7 Fairfield Road, Caerleon, Newport,
South Wales, NP18 3DQ, UK. Tel:- +44 (0) 1633 420647
FAX:- +44 (0) 870 1617274
Web site http://www.dhpot.demon.co.uk
Evelyn Bowers on fri 5 jul 02
I have a new eletric kiln that fires to cone 8 ox. can anyone please give me some wonderful cone 8 Glazes???????
Omaeve Bowers Shenandoah Valley, Virginia,USA
omaeve Evelyn T. Bowers
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: Click Here
Marianne Lombardo on fri 5 jul 02
Omaeve;
My kiln is rated to fire to a maximum of cone 8 but I've found that's really
pushing it. As the elements get used more and more, it takes a little bit
longer to get up to temperature. So I never fire higher than cone 6. I
believe that way, my elements might last a bit longer. My kiln is an old
one, so perhaps things are different with the newer kilns, I don't know.
There are a lot of lovely cone 6 glaze recipes available. And if you are
new to mixing your own glazes, then the best way to begin might be to buy
the book Mastering Cone 6 glazes. That way you can at least start with some
good, safe basic glazes and go from there.
If you to to this site: http://www.potters.org/categories.htm you will
find glazes for a variety of cones.
Marianne Lombardo
>I have a new eletric kiln that fires to cone 8 ox. can anyone please
>give me some wonderful cone 8 Glazes???????
Snail Scott on fri 5 jul 02
At 10:18 AM 7/5/02 -0400, you wrote:
I have a new eletric kiln that fires to cone 8 ox. can anyone please give
me some wonderful cone 8 Glazes???????
<<<<<<<<
If it's rated to ^8, fire it to ^6; the
elements will last longer. You don't gain
much from the additional two cones, IMHO,
and there are a ton of recipes for ^6 glazes
and clays. Commercial stuff, too.
I wouldn't fire your kiln to ^8 just because
the label says you can. It'll wear out
faster if pushed to its limit.
Do you have a particular reason for wanting
to go to ^8? If not, give your elements a
longer lifespan by firing a bit lower.
-Snail
>>>>
william schran on sat 6 jul 02
Omaeve - Just because your kiln can go to cone 8, doesn't mean you
want to fire it to that temperature all the time. That is the
manufacturer's top temperature recommendation. If you fire to top
temp all the time, you'll wear out everything that much sooner.
Theres' much info & glazes for cone 6 and that's the cone - IMHO - to
fire this kiln.
Bill
| |
|
