Roger W. Cramer on wed 10 sep 03
I would like to take this question of pugmills a step further. In their PR
Bailey is promoting their two auger pugmill, in part, on the basis
of 'virtually eliminating "auger memory"...which may cause defects in the
finished fired work.' Of course who wants spiral cracks in their finished
product. But what is the truth here about "auger memory". Those of you
who have been using single auger pugmills for years, are there real
problems with "auger memory" that someone purchasing a pugmill should be
concerned with, or is this more sales talk than anything else? Even Bailey
could respond to this question. If I am considering purchase of a Bailey
pugmill Model A (single auger) or Model B (twin augers) for a small studio
would this issue of "auger memory" warrent spending the added $800. for the
twin auger model? Thanks in advance for your responses. Roger Cramer
Elisabeth Maurland on wed 10 sep 03
I've never had any auger problems. I turn the clay "head first" on the wheel
when I start throwing, and I don't have trouble throwing nor cracks in the
fired pots. White stoneware, cone 6.
Elisabeth
> From: "Roger W. Cramer"
> Reply-To: Clayart
> Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 08:50:10 -0400
> To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
> Subject: Pugmills and "auger memory"
>
> I would like to take this question of pugmills a step further. In their PR
> Bailey is promoting their two auger pugmill, in part, on the basis
> of 'virtually eliminating "auger memory"...which may cause defects in the
> finished fired work.' Of course who wants spiral cracks in their finished
> product. But what is the truth here about "auger memory". Those of you
> who have been using single auger pugmills for years, are there real
> problems with "auger memory" that someone purchasing a pugmill should be
> concerned with, or is this more sales talk than anything else? Even Bailey
> could respond to this question. If I am considering purchase of a Bailey
> pugmill Model A (single auger) or Model B (twin augers) for a small studio
> would this issue of "auger memory" warrent spending the added $800. for the
> twin auger model? Thanks in advance for your responses. Roger Cramer
>
> ______________________________________________________________________________
> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
> melpots@pclink.com.
Malcolm Schosha on wed 10 sep 03
Roger,
I have thrown mostly with pugged clay, and the pugmills all had a
single auger. In my own experience, I have never had any problems at
all with spiral cracks, deformation, or whatever. But throwing
techniques do vary a lot, and it is possible that could make some
difference. It is important to work the clay well enough in the
throwing process, particularly the foot when opening. For someone who
throws off the hump, where the foot can not be worked, there might be
something to worry about.
Different pugmills do really produce different quality extrusions,
and the results of some can be more pleasant to work with than
others. What I think offers the biggest improvement in the feel of
the clay is vacuum de-airing, but it is not really necessary either.
What would be more useful to you than the opinions of many potters,
is to actually try out some pugmills and see how it works for you.
Malcolm
Brooklyn, NY
..............................................
--- In clayart@yahoogroups.com, "Roger W. Cramer"
wrote:
> I would like to take this question of pugmills a step further. In
their PR
> Bailey is promoting their two auger pugmill, in part, on the basis
> of 'virtually eliminating "auger memory"...which may cause defects
in the
> finished fired work.' Of course who wants spiral cracks in their
finished
> product. But what is the truth here about "auger memory". Those
of you
> who have been using single auger pugmills for years, are there real
> problems with "auger memory" that someone purchasing a pugmill
should be
> concerned with, or is this more sales talk than anything else?
Even Bailey
> could respond to this question. If I am considering purchase of a
Bailey
> pugmill Model A (single auger) or Model B (twin augers) for a small
studio
> would this issue of "auger memory" warrent spending the added $800.
for the
> twin auger model? Thanks in advance for your responses. Roger
Cramer
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
________
> Send postings to clayart@l...
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your
subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@p...
pdp1@EARTHLINK.NET on wed 10 sep 03
Hi Roger,
Is this another way of saying that one does best to Wedge
nicely?
Or how else would 'Auger Memory' remain to vex one's
Throwing?
Phil
Las Vegas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roger W. Cramer"
> I would like to take this question of pugmills a step
further. In their PR
> Bailey is promoting their two auger pugmill, in part, on
the basis
> of 'virtually eliminating "auger memory"...which may cause
defects in the
> finished fired work.' Of course who wants spiral cracks
in their finished
> product. But what is the truth here about "auger memory".
Those of you
> who have been using single auger pugmills for years, are
there real
> problems with "auger memory" that someone purchasing a
pugmill should be
> concerned with, or is this more sales talk than anything
else? Even Bailey
> could respond to this question. If I am considering
purchase of a Bailey
> pugmill Model A (single auger) or Model B (twin augers)
for a small studio
> would this issue of "auger memory" warrent spending the
added $800. for the
> twin auger model? Thanks in advance for your responses.
Roger Cramer
>
>
____________________________________________________________
__________________
> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your
subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached
at melpots@pclink.com.
David Hendley on wed 10 sep 03
Cracks from "auger memory" has never been a concern with
my Bluebird 440, which I use instead of hand wedging.
The clay goes right from the pugmill to the wheel, but is hand
formed into ball shapes, so the clay could end up in any
alignment on the wheelhead.
David Hendley
david@farmpots.com
http://www.farmpots.com
----- Original Message -----
> But what is the truth here about "auger memory". Those of you
> who have been using single auger pugmills for years, are there real
> problems with "auger memory" that someone purchasing a pugmill should be
> concerned with,
Vince Pitelka on wed 10 sep 03
Roger -
This has come up on Clayart before, without any definitive resolution, but
perhaps this time someone will add some good information.
I have used a single-auger deairing pugmill built from Harry Davis's design
for 25 years, and I can't say that I have ever experienced anything that
might be associated with "auger memory." I do not wedge the clay after it
comes out of the pugmill, although lots of people do. However, I do
wheel-wedge (cone the clay up and down on the wheel) quite thoroughly in all
cases, so if "auger memory" does in fact exist, I might be eliminating it
with my wheel wedging. But I can't say I have ever heard of this concept
referred to in these terms until Bailey came up with it. Sounds like a good
sales gimmick to me, although I do think that Bailey makes excellent
products.
Best wishes -
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft
Tennessee Technological University
1560 Craft Center Drive, Smithville TN 37166
Home - vpitelka@dtccom.net
615/597-5376
Office - wpitelka@tntech.edu
615/597-6801 x111, FAX 615/597-6803
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
steve harrison on thu 11 sep 03
Hi Roger,
I have two Venco 4" deairers, one for white bodies and one for dark
clays.
I throw straight from the pug. Just turn the lump on its side to avoid
the spiral memory.
On Thursday, September 11, 2003, at 08:26 AM, Des & Jan Howard wrote:
> Roger W. Cramer" wrote:
>
>> I would like to take this question of pugmills a step further.
Best wishes
Steve Harrison
Hot & Sticky Pty Ltd
5 Railway Pde
Balmoral Village
NSW 2571
Australia
http://ian.currie.to/sh/Steve_Harrisons_books.html
Pierces on thu 11 sep 03
Folks,
We believe in "auger memory" now after using a press. To keep pressed round
bowls round after firing we always put the pug vertical and headup in the
mould before pressing. After thinking about the way the clay is wound up by
the auger in our venco pugmills this best simulates the way the clay would
be formed on the wheel (anti-clockwise wheel head rotation). It also allows
us to further modify the pot by some extra throwing on the wheel soon after
pressing, something that we do a lot of to add variations to our range.
I believe "auger memory" is quickly overridden by coning so is hardly an
issue to a thrower.
Ric Pierce
Studio Ceramic Artists
One Tree Hill Pottery
www.onetreehillpottery.com.au
Richard Aerni on thu 11 sep 03
On Wed, 10 Sep 2003 17:54:40 -0500, David Hendley wrote:
>Cracks from "auger memory" has never been a concern with
>my Bluebird 440, which I use instead of hand wedging.
>The clay goes right from the pugmill to the wheel, but is hand
>formed into ball shapes, so the clay could end up in any
>alignment on the wheelhead.
>
I no longer mix my own clay, but have it mixed for me by one of the larger
companies serving the field. Here is how I found out that there is "auger
memory" in the clay...I simply cut a one inch cross section of the clay pug
as it comes out of the 25 pound bag, and then give it the U-bend
treatment. You can see the clay separating in spiral/circular tracks,
which to me implies "auger memory." I don't do this often, and perhaps the
mixing technology has changed so that it no longer occurs, but it was there
in the past. Jonathan Kaplan used to wax poetic on this list about
the "problem", and his simple solution was to form the clay into a ball and
then slap it sideways on the wheelhead (to use a baking analogy...if the
clay ball were a cinnamon sticky bun, the cinnamon spirals would be facing
sideways, not staight up as they do in the real sticky bun). For myself, I
always give any clay a dozen or so token wedges just to "loosen up" the
platelets, and then slap the wedged clay onto the wheelhead sideways.
Best,
Richard Aerni
Bloomfield, NY...taking the seat-of-the-pants-become-a-realtor-course...
Des & Jan Howard on thu 11 sep 03
Roger
In our 3" non-deairing Venco pugmill, just past the auger,
we have placed a stainless steel diverter that directs the
clay flow diagonally across the pug,
(if you can't picture this, s'OK neither can I).
We don't get auger memory, we don't wedge before use
& we place the clay lump upright on the wheel.
Des
"Roger W. Cramer" wrote:
> I would like to take this question of pugmills a step further. In their PR
> Bailey is promoting their two auger pugmill, in part, on the basis
> of 'virtually eliminating "auger memory"...which may cause defects in the
> finished fired work.' Of course who wants spiral cracks in their finished
> product. But what is the truth here about "auger memory". Those of you
> who have been using single auger pugmills for years, are there real
> problems with "auger memory" that someone purchasing a pugmill should be
> concerned with, or is this more sales talk than anything else? Even Bailey
> could respond to this question. If I am considering purchase of a Bailey
> pugmill Model A (single auger) or Model B (twin augers) for a small studio
> would this issue of "auger memory" warrent spending the added $800. for the
> twin auger model? Thanks in advance for your responses. Roger Cramer
--
Des & Jan Howard
Lue Pottery
LUE NSW 2850
Australia
Ph/Fax 02 6373 6419
http://www.luepottery.hwy.com.au
| |
|
