Oxygen LPM - Page 2

MythBuster · #31 2006-05-30, 9:58am

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbinkster

Seeing as how you yourself are not a lampworker (unless you left that part out), I can see how some of these phrases would hold little or no meaning to you.

Whatever.

Unhijacking this thread... and returning to the original intent...where the starter was gathering information to make a well informed decision about matching an oxygen system to a torch.

When we do have a chart of what it takes to feed specific torches, in terms of fuel and oxygen, cf/h-lpm, and psi (official info supplied by the torch maker - not girl friends)... compared with a chart of what specific concentrators can supply in terms of lpm, psi, and purity (also official info), then the two charts can be brought side by side for a lampworker's informed torch/fuel/oxygen system selection process.

This information is not being used to "pick a torch", but to determine what is needed in terms of a fuel/oxygen supply system to feed it... to get it to work... at minimum/maximum performance... whatever that "performance" might be.

The pedestrian terminology of "miles per gallon", if directly applied to this, would be "hours (miles) per cubic foot (gallons)" of torch time. 200 cf tank with 10 cf/h torch, equals 20 hours of torch time. This can also be applied as follows: Knowing that the torch operates at 10 cf/h tells me that I need a oxygen system that can deliver 10 cf/h, if I expect to operate the torch at optimal design levels.

Of course, the key to all this is getting information directly from the manufacturer... and since, Kimberly dear, you are NOT the manufacturer, I take everthing you purport about GTT (and other) torches with a grain of salt... In fact... I will no longer waste my time responding to your tomaceous diatribes.

Now is there more??? Pam is 100% completely correct that oxygen flow is not the true determiner of heat output. It is how well (efficiently) a torch design can convert a cubic foot of propane into something else, and while doing so, exothermically release large amounts of heat. Heat that can be measured in btu/h and btu/cf density. That's the "hotter" referred to.. And it is measureable. There could be an official "Torch Performance" chart, which could be used to compare torch-to-torch... but that would be for an entirely different, new thread - which I would gladly contribute to.

Blessings

pam · #32 2006-05-30, 10:30am

Buster, could you tell me the type equipment that would be necessary in order to determine btu? Is this something that would need to be done under laboratory conditions by someone with a huge amount of equipment, or could it be done by someone holding a thermometer in the flame, lol.

So, a torch can be designed to effectively provide more heat using less oxy/fuel. It's nice to hear that verified by someone with your knowledge. It has been my feeling for years that the GTT torches as a whole run much hotter than other torches, so I assumed their oxy consumption was very high. When I started using the one I obtained, I was surprised that it actually was using what I thought was less oxy than the torch I was using before, doing the same work. Thanks for that insight.

And please don't let Brent's attitude turn you against Kimberly. She is very knowledgeable regarding the GTT line of torches, as well as other torches. She gives a lot of good advice here on the forum, just as you have done. She does get her dander up when she perceives that her so's company is being maligned. And I know for a fact that the website was not being manned by Willy and Wally until fairly recently. I know that as of approximately a year ago, by my memory, I still couldn't get in touch with them that way.

So, I just got off the phone with Wally, and he says firmly that the Bobcat is around 10 cf/h. He hasn't gotten to that one yet with the new equipment, but that he believes it will test out at 10. Final authority. He also says he did not take over the website until approximately May of 2005, so if you have an email purportedly signed by him, it was not him, and he apologizes for the wrong info you got. He is in the midst of doing all the testing of all the GTT torches and the results will be put on the website when he is finished.

kbinkster · #33 2006-05-30, 10:57am

Mr. Smiley 2006-05-30 4:55am
________________________________________
Those "tests" done by Lewis and company were not accurate The numbers between users were all over the map. None of them had any real experience dialing in a hot flame on a Cuda...

You know, someone else told Lewis that he didn’t know how to run the ‘cuda, as well. Think about what you are implying… Lewis Wilson has had over thirty years full-time lampworking experience. He knows how to dial in a flame. If Lewis Wilson could not dial in the correct flame on a ‘cuda, what does that say for the average lampworker?

I sure wish you would stop slamming Bethlehem all over the place Miss Kimberly. GTT's are good torches, but not the only game in town. Just because the torch cuts through a 5/8" rod a little faster, doesn't mean it's better. Especially if the Cuda wasn't set right. The Cuda even beat the GTT in one test. If it was a real test and has nothing to do with settings, how did this snafu happen? If a GTT is always better or faster, how did the Cuda out perform it by one user in one situation? Maybe he had the Cuda dialed in correctly... This is such crap.

The scope of this discussion, until you involved yourself, was heat and its relation to oxygen consumption. That’s it. I did not say that one torch was “better” than another. In fact, I said, “Deciding which torch fits which application is best determined through testing. The way artists work is not a constant that you could plug into a neat little formula. It would be great if it were that simple. Everyone has a different working style. Everyone has preferences. GTT has great plans for the website. It will eventually contain lots of very useful information. But, even with every possible spec out there up for public consumption, nothing beats sitting behind a torch and trying out it for oneself.”

Even if the Barracuda were a little bit hotter than a Lynx, so what? Would two seconds faster melt time make up for three times the oxygen consumption?

That is the topic of discussion – oxygen consumption.

The little bobkitty you've got there will not out perform a Piranha. One more jet makes zero difference, port size is a factor as well. It's the way the fuel is used and mixed as it leaves the torch. The Piranha has been discontinued by Bethlehem because it was so close in price to the new Betta. Nothing more. No defects no slow sales... it's a great little torch.

I did not say that the Piranha was discontinued because it was defective. Heck, I didn’t even bring up that recall they had on them last year.

As far as the Bobcat outperforming a Piranha… Go ahead, test it out. Bring it.

GTT has been know to have several issues over the years and instead of addressing them, you guys keep side stepping and denying.

What issues? GTT has never had to recall any of its torches. GTT has never discontinued a line of torches.

Go work on the website and provide some really helpful technical data. Stop the torch wars! It's just plain silly the way you slip in little digs about Beth all the time and then claim you don't have anything against them. How about some honesty!!!!!

How is comparing technical specs slipping in digs? It sounds to me like you don’t like what you’re hearing.

Pam, feel free to come in here and say AGAIN, how nice and helpful Kimberly is...

Hold on to your hat Mythbuster... it's a rough ride when you tangle with this "one".

kbinkster · #34 2006-05-30, 10:59am

(cont'd)

Mr. Smiley 2006-05-30 5:09am
________________________________________
By the way, I hope the origional question was asnswered before the thread got derailed.

This thread pretty much stayed on the topic of oxygen consumption until you came in.

Welcome to the forum Mythbuster... I hope you don't take Kimberly's attitude as the norm around here. I've been into it with her before and she likes to hit below the belt. It's something I've come to expect. I just hit back every once in a while. Good luck working this one out.

Hitting below the belt? You are the one who takes the discussion to a personal level. I stick to the topic. I present facts. Some people just don’t like the facts when they see them. And as far as hitting back once in a while, you have already stated elsewhere that you will argue with me every chance you get. You really should let it go, Brent. You are a representative of Bethlehem. You sell their torches, everyone knows that. You are a bad reflection on that company.

pam 2006-05-30 5:22am
________________________________________
I guess, for myself, I wasn't thinking of using the figures to determine which torch is hotter. Perhaps my 18 years of using a torch makes me not even question that a torch with more ports may not be as hot as a torch with fewer ports, or a torch that uses more oxy may not be as hot as one that uses less oxy. I really think the chart would be great for determining which oxy supply to use.

Oh, I agree, Pam. Such a chart would be very useful for determining the oxygen needs of a torch. It is just important to realize that oxygen usage does not always directly translate into heat output. The Lynx uses 1/3 the oxygen of the Barracuda and puts out a similar amount of heat.

Kimberly is right about the heat being unrelated to the oxy/fuel consumption. I have a PM2D, a Starfire (predecessor to the Barracuda) and a Cheetah, plus Minors. Although the two larger torches have many more ports and uses much more oxy, they do not melt glass as fast as the Cheetah. I would say, in a layman's vernacular, that they are not as hot.

It's always amazing to me the information you receive when people start discussing something like this. So, Kimberly, you are saying that the Barracuda has slightly less than twice as many oxy jets as it does fuel jets.

The Barracuda has as many propane jets as oxygen jets for the center fire (six and six). On the outerfire, it has twice as many oxygen jets as propane jets (twenty-four and twelve).

I find that really interesting considering the slightly reductive flame atmosphere of that torch. So, does that mean that perhaps the fuel ports are larger than the oxy ports to create this slightly reductive atmosphere, or is there some other information that plays into flame atmosphere?

Actually, it appears that the fuel ports are smaller than the oxygen ports on the outer fire.

The Lynx, as described, has an equal amount of fuel ports to oxy ports and it has a more oxygenated flame, when comparing the two you would think the Barracuda would have the oxy rich flame.

You would think.

Just perhaps, Buster, companies that do not publish their cf/h numbers feel that it is trade secret. I know, for instance, that the triple-mix torch was the invention of GTT and it could - (not saying they do) - be that they consider publishing that info as trade secret, even though they are willing to give it out to those who ask. Or maybe they don't publish that info because they feel that the info may give a false picture of how the torches perform, since if you use the amount of oxy/fuel consumed it doesn't seem to convey which torch runs the hottest.

Very interesting.

The cf/h numbers do give a false picture of torches’ performances, but the biggest reason that the info isn’t up on the GTT site is that, well, the site is incomplete.

Just posted and read Brent's rants, so decided to add, thank you, Kimberly, for being so helpful.

You’re welcome.

And Brent, I will agree with you that for certain situations the Barracuda would be better to use than the Lynx, which it is being compared to.

Again, I want to point out that I made the comparison of the Lynx to the Barracuda to demonstrate how oxygen consumption does not always accurately predict heat. The Baracuda is a fine torch. Lots of people use them. People have their preferences. But, I will say that I can get a GTT to imitate just about any flame characteristic out there, so to me, it has the most versatility (that is one thing that we hope to include on the website – dialing in the various flames). But, if someone likes a different torch, they like a different torch. I don’t have a problem with that. I only have a problem when people intentionally put out misinformation about things.

The Barracuda works tubing or anything that requires radiant heat much better than the more focused flame of the Lynx. I love the Beth torches and have nothing against them. I am willing to look at both manufacturers' torches dispassionately. I invested $750 for my Starfire and $1150 for the PM2D with Beth and I have never regretted buying them. They are still great torches. However, for the $550 I spent on the Cheetah, it is a much hotter torch, in my opinion, and a much better torch for my application.

Mr. Smiley 2006-05-30 5:40am
________________________________________
I'm running a Cheetah and Cuda on the same oxy concentrators and the Cuda is hands down hotter over a larger area, can get a more pin point flame and is just more versatile. It melts larger gathers of glass faster and has a much bigger flame. I guess it really does depend on whose running them and what they are using them for.

Yes, it all depends on who is running the torch, since I have heard other glassworkers make claims to the contrary of what you just posted.

Now, if I ONLY want a super focused laser cutting flame to melt through a big rod, I'd probably choose the GTT for the job. The faster flame transfers a penetrating heat to the core. That is a super focused fast flame though and it has limited uses. I work on both all the time. It depends on my mood. If I had to give one up, the Cheetah is hitting the bricks.

The flame can be focused when you want it to be focused. Otherwise, it can be run just like a standard torch.

Mr. Smiley 2006-05-30 5:46am
________________________________________
As far as trade secrets go... the GTT's are patented. Here's the diagram of the whole internal working of the torch. I highly doubt there is anything left to protect.

http://www.thegldg.com/forum/showthr...ghlight=patent

This link takes you to the GLDG... a great site with lots of info. It's mostly boro workers and our very own Misha is Queen Mod there. Check the site out if you have some time... it's got lot's of useful discussions about torches.

Arrrh, aye, matey, take a good look at the patent. You will see where Bethlehem got the information for the cooling system used by the Betta.

pam 2006-05-30 5:53am
________________________________________
I agree with you, Brent, it all depends on whose running them and what they are using them for. If I had to get rid of one of my torches, it would break my heart, because they each have their uses, but since I haven't used the PM2D or the Starfire since I learned to use the Cheetah, the Cheetah is definitely staying. Let's see, I could make a statement like, in my opinion Beth torches are just not beadmaking torches, but I wouldn't do that because I am smart enough to realize that what works for me and my work is different than what works for someone else and their work. Beth makes fine torches, as does GTT, and each person has to determine for themselves what works best for them.

I agree, Pam. I have my preferences, and I have my reasons for those preferences. It is up to each individual to determine what torch works best for them.

Mr. Smiley 2006-05-30 6:02am
________________________________________
You could make that statement and I wouldn't attack you for it, belittle you or say you just don't know what you are doing... neither would the wife / fiance / or girlfriend of an owner from Bethlehem.

I've got more class than that.

We all know about what kind of class you have, Brent. The things you post in the Bathroom and the Bedroom on this site speak volumes. The way you treat me on this forum speaks quite loudly, as well.

Mr. Smiley 2006-05-30 6:42am
________________________________________
For those of you wondering what that last bit is about, I'll shed some light.

I made the statement that GTT was a boro torch in my opinion. That Beths made a good cross over torch, to do both soft and hard glass. That if you were working soft glass exclusively, a Minor or Mini would do the trick. All, just my opinion on what torches fit best based on my experience. It drug out into a 3 or 4 day fight. Kimberly tore me a new one by attacking my motives and my ability to run a torch. Apparently, I'm not allowed to make a statement like that. Of course you can work soft glass on a GTT... I just think it's best suited for boro.

Oh, Brent, you know you said more than just that…

There, now hopefully that last little dig Pam and I exchanged will make more sense. Be careful around here folks. Opinions about torches can get you into big trouble... really!

Well, opinions won’t get you into trouble, but out and out false claims will.

A lot of past baggage comes into play when there is ever a discussion about torches. Willy and Wally used to work for Bethlehem before splitting and forming GTT.

No, they did not “split” and form GTT. I wrote the entire explanation on that GLDG thread you referenced. If anyone is interested, I can copy it and paste it over here. While I’m at it, I might just go into more detail about the situation. Man, if you think the Wal-Mart photolab is a dangerous place to work…

Their parting was not on good terms. Kimberly is engaged to Willy. It's a bunch of torch company politics and past hurt feelings. I just wish people would admit it and be honest. Don't say you have nothing against Bethlehem and then sling mud at them every chance you get. Be honest and let every one know why you are so negative towards the Bethlehem line of torches. Kimberly, It's OK not to like somebody or a company... you're not going to like everybody or support a company that has left a bad taste in your mouth... it's human nature.

Brent, slinging mud is one thing, presenting data is another. Let’s get that straight. And as far as being bitter about Bethlehem, I’m not. Willy and Wally are not. They have often said that when Bethlehem kicked them out the door, that was the best thing they could have ever done for them. They take the negatives in life and turn them into positive. That’s a lesson a lot of people should learn.

kbinkster · #35 2006-05-30, 11:00am

(cont'd some more)

Mr. Smiley 2006-05-30 7:07am
________________________________________
Quote:
________________________________________
Originally Posted by kbinkster
You posted erroneous information. I gave you the correct information. I did not fault you for it, as it seemed to be an honest mistake. After all, you had an email with those figures. I never called you a liar. But, nonetheless, you then get defensive and take on a tone of sarcasm and start swinging at GTT for something that was quite literally out of their control.
________________________________________

OK, so GTT had somebody handling THEIR website and it was out of their control??? How is that even remotely possible? Did the guy sending the information hack the site? Nope, they were hired. Now, they are the scape goat for the "misinformation".

I already explained how that happened. Do you really think that if Willy and Wally had direct control of that site, it would contain the errors that it does? The pictures are skewed and there are misspellings. I do have a few HTML skills, certainly enough to have corrected those mistakes.

You don't work for GTT. I asked Wally and he said you have NOTHING to do with GTT. Is that their next defense if YOU give out misinformation?

Yeah, right.

It’s true, I am not on payroll. I post my opinions and I post technical information. When I have questions about something, I ask Willy and Wally. When I make a mistake about something, I correct it. I’m not hiding anything. And, they are not hiding behind me. What I post is ultimately my responsibility, but if I say that something comes from them, it does. I you doubt a figure that I post, Brent, call GTT and ask for yourself.

All Mythbuster is saying is the same thing I've said... the same thing a LOT of people have said... publish it on the site. Don't trickle it out here and there... post it! Then GTT would have fewer phone questions to answer and more time to build torches. Maybe the several month waiting list would get shorter. It would be good for GTT and the whole flame working community to have that info online.

Yes, I agree that having information would be beneficial to everybody. That is something that is in the works (and has been for quite a while). There is a lot going on “behind the scenes” that you have no idea about. The GTT website is not complete. No one ever said that it was. In the meantime, I am on here doing what I can to answer questions and help people.

Does it contracdict the efficiency claims? I don't know...

Of course not.

Also, Lance at Flametree has always told people to leave the blue knob at least cracked. He is notorious for coming up behind students and readjusting their flame setting, so the torch doesn't get "damaged". Is he being too careful or is it as you suggested in other threads, an easy torch to run and safe at all settings (with one candle length requirement for a soft flame)... I've also heard he is certified to work on GTT's. Is this true or more misinformation? There seems to be so much misinformation surrounding GTT, my head spins and I'm sure I'm not the only one. GTT needs to handle their business better and personally. Please ask them to publish the data. JMHO

I went into great lengths on another thread describing how many different ways you can run a GTT. I should take all that info and start a thread with that information. Maybe you could make it a sticky.

Lance is not certified to work on GTTs. No one is. As far as whether or not he was being “too careful,” I would not know. I would have to see for myself what kind of flame a person had dialed in. But I will say that Lance of Flametree Glass Supplies has EXTENSIVE knowledge of GTT torches. He also knows how to run a GTT for soft glass very effectively. Pity, you didn’t go in and let him show you the correct way to run your Mirage for soft glass when he was still in Florida. You could have learned something.

There is a lot of misinformation out there. Who do you think puts it out? I have a good idea from whence a lot of it comes. I know where one of the biggest bits of information came from – straight out of Bruce’s mouth at a GAS conference show in Florida. So, if you would like to discuss where these rumors originate, I’ll be happy to oblige.

GTT does handle its business well. They handle it personally over the telephone, as well. What other torch company can you call and speak directly to the inventor of the torch they sell?

So, there you go.

kbinkster · #36 2006-05-30, 11:26am

Quote: