markb
Cave Dweller
Member since May 2022
Posts: 472
|
Post by markb on Jun 18, 2022 2:14:39 GMT -5
&markb Indeed Mark, it would lol! (Why am I up this late?🧐) Yes, you're giddy, go to bed!
|
|
stefan
Cave Dweller
Member since January 2005
Posts: 14,095
|
Post by stefan on Jun 18, 2022 18:14:10 GMT -5
Not to discredit anything said here, but I experiemented with a 1 year no touch run (actually ran 1 year and 3 months). I started 60/90 and ran it without peeking for 1 year and 3 months. THe results? Yeah wasted a lot of time lol. THe rocks were smooth for sure but still needed 120/220 onward. Anyway my original thoughts were that the grit would break down finer and finer until I got a polish. Big NOPE on that theory. I do save my used slurry. I have a very careful method. I let the slurry settle for 12 to 24 hours. I dump off the water and the top 2/3s of mud (presumable the lighter material) and save the bottom 1/3 (heavier material) I use this as a starter in my next run. I track my starting input of rock and my finished output for course stage. I have run course runs with and without my slurry starter and I do see a "slight" increase in the amount of rock I can move on when I use my slurry starter. So much depends on rock hardness, shape, size. I do the same process for all stages (including polish).
|
|
hypodactylus
spending too much on rocks
Member since July 2021
Posts: 440
|
Post by hypodactylus on Jun 18, 2022 20:51:11 GMT -5
Not to discredit anything said here, but I experiemented with a 1 year no touch run (actually ran 1 year and 3 months). I started 60/90 and ran it without peeking for 1 year and 3 months. THe results? Yeah wasted a lot of time lol. THe rocks were smooth for sure but still needed 120/220 onward. Anyway my original thoughts were that the grit would break down finer and finer until I got a polish. Big NOPE on that theory. I do save my used slurry. I have a very careful method. I let the slurry settle for 12 to 24 hours. I dump off the water and the top 2/3s of mud (presumable the lighter material) and save the bottom 1/3 (heavier material) I use this as a starter in my next run. I track my starting input of rock and my finished output for course stage. I have run course runs with and without my slurry starter and I do see a "slight" increase in the amount of rock I can move on when I use my slurry starter. So much depends on rock hardness, shape, size. I do the same process for all stages (including polish). I recommend that you check out this video:
|
|
|
Post by Jugglerguy on Jun 18, 2022 20:57:36 GMT -5
|
|
hypodactylus
spending too much on rocks
Member since July 2021
Posts: 440
|
Post by hypodactylus on Jun 18, 2022 23:15:42 GMT -5
Nice thread with some good information.
|
|
markb
Cave Dweller
Member since May 2022
Posts: 472
|
Post by markb on Jun 19, 2022 0:55:09 GMT -5
Not to discredit anything said here, but I experiemented with a 1 year no touch run (actually ran 1 year and 3 months). I started 60/90 and ran it without peeking for 1 year and 3 months. THe results? Yeah wasted a lot of time lol. THe rocks were smooth for sure but still needed 120/220 onward. Anyway my original thoughts were that the grit would break down finer and finer until I got a polish. Big NOPE on that theory. I do save my used slurry. I have a very careful method. I let the slurry settle for 12 to 24 hours. I dump off the water and the top 2/3s of mud (presumable the lighter material) and save the bottom 1/3 (heavier material) I use this as a starter in my next run. I track my starting input of rock and my finished output for course stage. I have run course runs with and without my slurry starter and I do see a "slight" increase in the amount of rock I can move on when I use my slurry starter. So much depends on rock hardness, shape, size. I do the same process for all stages (including polish). I recommend that you check out this video: Now that was a very interesting experiment, thanks for referring me to it.
|
|
Wooferhound
Cave Dweller
Lortone QT66 and 3A
Member since December 2016
Posts: 1,426
|
Post by Wooferhound on Jun 19, 2022 7:25:21 GMT -5
My original thoughts were that the grit would break down finer and finer until I got a polish. Big NOPE on that theory. I have tried to make Shiny rocks using Silicon Carbide, but it does not matter how small the powder is, No Polish will be produced, only a hazy shine.
|
|
stefan
Cave Dweller
Member since January 2005
Posts: 14,095
|
Post by stefan on Jun 19, 2022 9:34:51 GMT -5
Yup watched that one (I watch all of Rob's vids)!
|
|
markb
Cave Dweller
Member since May 2022
Posts: 472
|
Post by markb on Jun 19, 2022 11:34:43 GMT -5
After reading through this whole thread I'm leaning more towards Cleanout vs Recharge. I can see the logic for both ways, but ultimately I just want to find the fastest method possible to move rocks beyond Stage 1. I also like to check up on my rocks in Stage 1 and remove those that can be moved to Stage 2, before I lose too much mass on them. The one missing variable that wasn't explored enough I think was the water level in the barrel. Most say fill to just below the tops of the rocks, but I'm finding that going to 1-1.5" below the tops seems to produce a quicker grind with 80 Sic. Perhaps a water level experiment is in order for my immediate future. I found the comparison between using Sic or AO in the year long run interesting. The shine was definitely better with AO, but I wonder if the results would be the same in a 6, 3, or 1 month comparison tumble. If not, then it's pretty safe to say that for me I won't be doing any year-long runs and for now I will just stick with Sic 80 grit in Stage 1, then on to 220, 500 and polish in the vibe. Jugglerguy, how many Stages do you tumble in the rotary, before moving to the vibe?
|
|
hypodactylus
spending too much on rocks
Member since July 2021
Posts: 440
|
Post by hypodactylus on Jun 19, 2022 14:14:54 GMT -5
A water level experiment could be interesting; I see various opinions/methods with anecdotal experiences, but I have yet to see one with compelling evidence. My personal experience is that it doesn't really matter all that much, as long as the slurry doesn't get too thick (a thin slurry seems to work just fine). However, I have never set up a controlled experiment to find out.
Perhaps there is a thread or Jugglerguy/Michigan Rocks video on this topic, but I haven't found one.
|
|
|
Post by Jugglerguy on Jun 20, 2022 17:14:44 GMT -5
After reading through this whole thread I'm leaning more towards Cleanout vs Recharge. I can see the logic for both ways, but ultimately I just want to find the fastest method possible to move rocks beyond Stage 1. I also like to check up on my rocks in Stage 1 and remove those that can be moved to Stage 2, before I lose too much mass on them. The one missing variable that wasn't explored enough I think was the water level in the barrel. Most say fill to just below the tops of the rocks, but I'm finding that going to 1-1.5" below the tops seems to produce a quicker grind with 80 Sic. Perhaps a water level experiment is in order for my immediate future. I found the comparison between using Sic or AO in the year long run interesting. The shine was definitely better with AO, but I wonder if the results would be the same in a 6, 3, or 1 month comparison tumble. If not, then it's pretty safe to say that for me I won't be doing any year-long runs and for now I will just stick with Sic 80 grit in Stage 1, then on to 220, 500 and polish in the vibe. Jugglerguy, how many Stages do you tumble in the rotary, before moving to the vibe? I'm sure that the majority of the grinding in that video was done in the first couple of months. I ran them for a year for a couple reasons. For one, I was trying to make a video that would get a lot of attention and therefore a lot of views. The other reason was that I want to be absolutely sure that I had run them long enough that I wouldn't have to wonder what would have happened if I had just done them a little longer. After a year, I can be pretty sure that those rocks in the silicon carbide were never going to get shiny. I sure don't recommend that anyone run rocks for a year. I go one week at a time the first, coarse grinding stage. I only run the first stage in a rotary tumbler. I use 46/70 for the first stage. After that, I move to the Lot-O with 220 silicon carbide, then 500 aluminum oxide and finally aluminum oxide polish.
|
|
|
Post by Jugglerguy on Jun 20, 2022 17:16:12 GMT -5
A water level experiment could be interesting; I see various opinions/methods with anecdotal experiences, but I have yet to see one with compelling evidence. My personal experience is that it doesn't really matter all that much, as long as the slurry doesn't get too thick (a thin slurry seems to work just fine). However, I have never set up a controlled experiment to find out. Perhaps there is a thread or Jugglerguy/Michigan Rocks video on this topic, but I haven't found one. This experiment is not on my YouTube channel, although it's something I should consider doing.
|
|
Mark K
Cave Dweller
Member since April 2012
Posts: 2,600
|
Post by Mark K on Jun 20, 2022 23:20:50 GMT -5
You can pour your used first round grit into a 100 mesh classifier and reuse the leavings in stage 1 again. It will not be as course, but it will be a mixture of everything from 100 up. Beyond that I think you are risking contamination. That is unless you have a really good classifier system that most of us just don't have the time or resources to fart around with. (you would be constantly fighting contamination)
|
|
doublebluff
having dreams about rocks
Member since September 2021
Posts: 55
|
Post by doublebluff on Jun 21, 2022 7:13:59 GMT -5
This has been a very informative thread, including the video. Thanks for posting, all.
|
|
Wooferhound
Cave Dweller
Lortone QT66 and 3A
Member since December 2016
Posts: 1,426
|
Post by Wooferhound on Jun 21, 2022 10:07:51 GMT -5
I have a couple of steps to recover the grit from all of my tumbles. When the slurry comes out of the drain, it goes into a Settlement tank first, before draining into the bucket. Everything that settles in that tank becomes slurry starter after it's been dried out. It will all go back into Stage 1 Course tumbles only. The stuff in the bucket will form a sludge after a day, but it is very fine and easily contaminated. I always get rid of it by swishing it around and pouring it in the corner of the yard.
Here is some Dried slurry starter, ready to use.
|
|
jimmie
starting to spend too much on rocks
Member since August 2021
Posts: 233
|
Post by jimmie on Jun 21, 2022 13:22:50 GMT -5
Pretty much the same thing I do, but I only save the stage one slurry. Same water I rinse the rocks with is added back to stage one. It works for me.
|
|
markb
Cave Dweller
Member since May 2022
Posts: 472
|
Post by markb on Jun 21, 2022 14:29:18 GMT -5
I have a couple of steps to recover the grit from all of my tumbles.
Here is some Dried slurry starter, ready to use.
Wooferhound, what happens if you don't add back in the reclaimed slurry that you collected? What is the difference in your tumbled results? That's where I was going with this thread, "how much value is there really by adding it back in?" I've done it both ways and am questioning the value of adding it. In your process, are you then reducing the amount of fresh grit you add to begin with? If so, by how much, how long are you running the batch for and what is your water level at? At first I thought by adding the reclaimed slurry back into a new tumble, it may reduce the amount of new grit I was using and add to the grinding action. Some say it enhances the tumble, because even though the reclaimed material is not at full size any more, it will still contribute to the grinding. However, I question that theory based on how long most of us let it work? Does it really contribute, or is the new coarser grit really doing the majority of work in the short run? If you omit adding in any new grit and just put back the reclaimed material, then run the batch for an extended amount of time, I think we could expect it to have a somewhat grinding effect on the stones, to a point. When you look at the year-long tumble Rob did, wasn't that the result? However, I don't believe many of us are tumbling our batches for long periods of time, but instead stopping after only one week. Some say the reclaim helps to thicken the slurry quicker, for better grinding action. While I understand that I have to wonder if it really matters how quickly you get to a thicker slurry, if only leaving it run for one week? It sounds to me that most are seeing full slurry coverage on the rocks at the end of one week anyway. To this end I began to experiment. I wanted to reduce the amount of slurry I was seeing in the barrel following a 1 week tumble, using 3 TBS of 80 Sic grit in a 3 LB barrel. My concern with this was that several of my rocks were loosing a considerable amount of mass within that timeframe, and I wanted to find a way to avoid over grinding rocks that were ready for Stage 2 in less than one week of tumbling. Since all my rocks are at a mohs 7 level, I could never tell which ones would grind down the fastest. So I began to reduce the amount of new 80 Sic grit I was adding into my runs by .5 TBS at a time, until I got to a point of having only a light skim of slurry left on the bottom of the barrel at the end of the run when using 1.5 TBS of grit. During this time I was also checking on the run every 2-3 days to see how things were doing. My evaluation at this time showed a couple rocks were ready to be pulled out around 2-3 days, but the majority needed just a bit more tumbling. Because I didn't want to add more grit, I decided to decrease the amount of water I was putting into my barrel to 1-1.5" below the tops of the rocks, vs just below the tops of the rocks as most say to do. In my mind this meant there would be more action between the rocks, causing more grinding. To help things even more, I added a mixture of very small rocks, that I got from some small gravel someone had once scattered in our yard for ground cover. I used these to fill in the gaps between the regular rock in the tumble, even though I had a mix of sizes in there to start with. The results with the reduction of water, use of several smalls in a batch, and reduced grit allowed me to get a pretty good Stage 1 tumble in only 48 hours. It also allows me to remove rocks that are ready to move to Stage 2, without over grinding them into smaller pieces. There are often some rocks that still need more of Stage 1, due to deeper pits and rough areas, but it's like that whether I run the initial batch longer or not. In the end, I believe I can get a more successful tumble in a 3 LB barrel in 48 hours, using 1.5 TBS of 80 Sic grit and less water. In future runs I'll be tracking the type of rock I'm tumbling, such as nature smoothed river rocks, rough irregular rocks, etc to see what the results will be.
|
|
Wooferhound
Cave Dweller
Lortone QT66 and 3A
Member since December 2016
Posts: 1,426
|
Post by Wooferhound on Jun 24, 2022 4:33:52 GMT -5
I have a couple of steps to recover the grit from all of my tumbles.
Here is some Dried slurry starter, ready to use.
What happens if you don't add back in the reclaimed slurry that you collected? What is the difference in your tumbled results? That's where I was going with this thread, "how much value is there really by adding it back in?" I've done it both ways and am questioning the value of adding it. In your process, are you then reducing the amount of fresh grit you add to begin with? If so, by how much, how long are you running the batch for and what is your water level at? At first I thought by adding the reclaimed slurry back into a new tumble, it may reduce the amount of new grit I was using and add to the grinding action. Some say it enhances the tumble, because even though the reclaimed material is not at full size any more, it will still contribute to the grinding. However, I question that theory based on how long most of us let it work? Does it really contribute, or is the new coarser grit really doing the majority of work in the short run? If you omit adding in any new grit and just put back the reclaimed material, then run the batch for an extended amount of time, I think we could expect it to have a somewhat grinding effect on the stones, to a point. When you look at the year-long tumble Rob did, wasn't that the result? However, I don't believe many of us are tumbling our batches for long periods of time, but instead stopping after only one week. Some say the reclaim helps to thicken the slurry quicker, for better grinding action. While I understand that I have to wonder if it really matters how quickly you get to a thicker slurry, if only leaving it run for one week? It sounds to me that most are seeing full slurry coverage on the rocks at the end of one week anyway. To this end I began to experiment. I wanted to reduce the amount of slurry I was seeing in the barrel following a 1 week tumble, using 3 TBS of 80 Sic grit in a 3 LB barrel. My concern with this was that several of my rocks were loosing a considerable amount of mass within that timeframe, and I wanted to find a way to avoid over grinding rocks that were ready for Stage 2 in less than one week of tumbling. Since all my rocks are at a mohs 7 level, I could never tell which ones would grind down the fastest.
My first tumbler was a single 3 pound barrel. I did my weekly cleanouts outside in the yard and there was usable grit being thrown away. This is when I got the idea do build a Cleanout Sink that could recover anything in the slurry that would still be useful for grinding in Stage 1. I had never seen anyone using a cleanout sink purposely built to do cleanouts before, I may have invented it ? The Grit Recovery system worked very well and seemed to be saving any particles smaller than #500 grit, I was very happy with it.
The next tumbler that I got was a QT66, those 6 pound barrels were much better at breaking down the grit but I was still recovering a lot of material in my settlement tank so I kept on drying it out and using it as Slurry Starter.
But your question is asking if it works better and is it worth it ? My answer would be that "I don't Know", I have always done it this way. I even get a little worried if I'm starting to get low on the dried stuff. I can only imagine that it would be better, especially in a 3 pound barrel where you need all the help you can get. Normally I would use 1/4 cup grit in my 6 pound barrels to run Stage 1 tumbles, if I use the slurry starter it will be Added In Addition to the normal grit.
You talk a little about Water and grinding Speed . . . Less water is Faster grinding but more Bruising and possibly more Undercutting. If you got some Tough rocks and you want to take them down fast, then put very little water in there and look for a thick slurry on cleanout day.
|
|
markb
Cave Dweller
Member since May 2022
Posts: 472
|
Post by markb on Jun 24, 2022 14:25:29 GMT -5
My first tumbler was a single 3 pound barrel. I did my weekly cleanouts outside in the yard and there was usable grit being thrown away. This is when I got the idea do build a Cleanout Sink that could recover anything in the slurry that would still be useful for grinding in Stage 1. I had never seen anyone using a cleanout sink purposely built to do cleanouts before, I may have invented it ? The Grit Recovery system worked very well and seemed to be saving any particles smaller than #500 grit, I was very happy with it. The next tumbler that I got was a QT66, those 6 pound barrels were much better at breaking down the grit but I was still recovering a lot of material in my settlement tank so I kept on drying it out and using it as Slurry Starter. But your question is asking if it works better and is it worth it ? My answer would be that "I don't Know", I have always done it this way. I even get a little worried if I'm starting to get low on the dried stuff. I can only imagine that it would be better, especially in a 3 pound barrel where you need all the help you can get. Normally I would use 1/4 cup grit in my 6 pound barrels to run Stage 1 tumbles, if I use the slurry starter it will be Added In Addition to the normal grit. You talk a little about Water and grinding Speed . . . Less water is Faster grinding but more Bruising and possibly more Undercutting. If you got some Tough rocks and you want to take them down fast, then put very little water in there and look for a thick slurry on cleanout day.
Wooferhound , thanks for your response! To help offset bruising when I lower my water level in the barrel, I include several "smalls", or smaller roundish rocks around 1/2" in size throughout the mix. I'm thinking this helps cushion between the larger regular rocks so they don't crash into each other and chip. In my recent batch I checked after 2 days, pulled 3 done rocks out and left 5 rocks with stubborn areas for more tumbling, added back the same water/slurry and recharged with 1.5 TBS 80 Sic and 1.5" w/ lower water level. I have read some folks use glass marbles and have good results, plus they are cheap. My small rocks are free and come from my yard where someone put down tumbled gravel for cover. I think in the end, we are both using a type of "media" to do the same job, you use dried slurry, I use small rocks, some use marbles, but all lessen the impact between larger rocks in Stage 1. Jugglerguy Rob, maybe you could do a comparison between reusing dried slurry or using small rocks or marbles in the Stage 1 tumble, to see if one produces better results than the others?
|
|
markb
Cave Dweller
Member since May 2022
Posts: 472
|
Post by markb on Jun 24, 2022 14:42:22 GMT -5
Okay, after much input received from many and thinking the whole process through more, here is a link to an overview from 2016 that I think is worth reading. In their conclusion, they say... "...there are people on the forum that each use one of the above methods or ones similar and they all produce polished rocks that will blind you (and I don't mean by getting hit in the eye by one!)...they shine to a brilliant sparkle! These people have "found" their recipe for producing outstanding polished rocks...no one person's recipe is exactly like the next person's...some recipes are like polar opposites. As time goes by, you will find *your* way of doing things. In the meantime, listen to the pros here, look at their results. If what they tell you sounds like something you'd like to try...try it. If you want to go down a rabbit trail...go down it...you might find a gold nugget in the rabbit hole you find there! Just remember that someone else may have already gone down that rabbit trail. " This seems to be the best conclusion I've come to as well. Cheers!
|
|