Flamemaster Torch

[Ian Stewart 12Participant @ianstewart12]

[Ian Stewart 12Participant @ianstewart12]

I have acquired a Flamemaster torch MkII which appears identical to ones advertised in ME in the late 1950s thru 1960. It seems to be in mint condition. i wonder if anyone has access to a manual or detailed operating instructions which could be scanned and forwarded please.

There are a couple of brief references to this torch in ME 1954 and 1956 and again in the forum a couple of years ago.

Thank You

Ian Stewart

 

Edited By JasonB on 24/04/2022 10:04:48

[bernard towersParticipant @bernardtowers37738]

Photo could be handy.

[Thor 🇳🇴Participant @thor]

Hi Ian,

Yes, a photo could be handy as Bernard says, I assume your Flamemaster torch is similar to this?

Thor

[Mark RandParticipant @markrand96270]

If it is, they don't normally get on all that well with gas/air. They were designed for coal/town gas rather than natural gas or propane. Gas/oxygen works better. Either that or a redesigned burner* with flame retention features.

* It's on my project list.

[BazyleParticipant @bazyle]

Could be valuable in a few years when they convert the gas main to hydrogen and propane/butane has been outlawed.

[John HinkleyParticipant @johnhinkley26699]

Posted by Mark Rand on 24/04/2022 14:42:08:

If it is, they don't normally get on all that well with gas/air. They were designed for coal/town gas rather than natural gas or propane. Gas/oxygen works better. Either that or a redesigned burner* with flame retention features.

If you look at another ad than the one pointed to by Thor, it states it's suitable for use with butane and compressed air, albeit the "plus" version.

Good luck with that. I think I'd get something a little more modern. The clue is in the manufacturer's name!

John

[V8EngParticipant @v8eng]

I think you will find that Chance Brothers was a major company in the glass making  industry from the early 1800s until they were taken over by Pilkilngtons in the 1950s.

Edited By V8Eng on 24/04/2022 18:26:57

[V8EngParticipant @v8eng]

Deleted double post!

Edited By V8Eng on 24/04/2022 18:20:56

[Mark RandParticipant @markrand96270]

Mine is a MkII Stone-Chance variety.

The one in the Labs at work was the more modern version with a flame control ring on the burner.

[Ian Stewart 12Participant @ianstewart12]

I have uploaded a couple of photos of the torch. The fitting on the end is to retain the nozzle assembly. It has to be screwed down tightly to push the nozzle against its seat, the tapered nose pushes against the three fins on the nozzle. I assume there may have been other sizes of nozzle available.

I guess it all comes down to the calorific value of the fuel gases. In Australia our LPG is mostly butane with a variable mix of propane. Reticulated gas is mostly methane. I believe reticulated gas in the UK in the 1950s was derived from coal and had quite a mix of gases.

I have a Dillon,( ie/Henrob/Cobra) torch which works very well with LPG and Oxygen, both fed in with less than 4psi. and very low flow rates.

[Alan CharlestonParticipant @alancharleston78882]

Hi,

I used to use one of these about 50 years ago for glassblowing in a lab. It was normally operated using oxy/natural gas for pyrex glass but I think it was also possible to use air/natural gas for soda glass. It came with three nozzle sizes for different flame sizes. I have an old Gallenkamp catalogue (probably from the 1960s) which shows it. If I've done it right, the entry should show up on this post.

Regards,

Alan

Edited By Alan Charleston on 25/04/2022 08:05:19

[SandgrounderParticipant @sandgrounder]

Posted by John Hinkley on 24/04/2022 16:55:34:

Posted by Mark Rand on 24/04/2022 14:42:08:

If it is, they don't normally get on all that well with gas/air. They were designed for coal/town gas rather than natural gas or propane. Gas/oxygen works better. Either that or a redesigned burner* with flame retention features.

If you look at another ad than the one pointed to by Thor, it states it's suitable for use with butane and compressed air, albeit the "plus" version.

Good luck with that. I think I'd get something a little more modern. The clue is in the manufacturer's name!

John

That's very interesting, I worked at Pilkington for 30 years and have visited two Chance factories, Smethwick and St Asaph and seen plenty of gas torches but never knew Chance made them.

John

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Ian Stewart 12 on 25/04/2022 04:33:29:

…

I guess it all comes down to the calorific value of the fuel gases.

I suspect more to do with getting the gas/air mix right. My unmodified bunsen burner stopped working after the UK switched to natural gas. Men did something to the central heating system, cooker and gas fires just before switch over, and they flared off the Town Gas before letting us relight them.

I think a wider nozzle is needed to burn Methane, and they may have adjusted the air-intake as well. Town Gas was mostly Hydrogen and Carbon Monoxide, whereas Natural gas is mostly Methane. The ratio of Hydrogen to Oxygen is 1:8, whereas Methane to Oxygen is 1:4, so to burn both a torch would need a wide adjustment range. A torch driven by compressed air might well be OK for that.

Dave

[BazyleParticipant @bazyle]

The problem with methane is that it burns more slowly and needs more air relative to the volume of gas. Therefore in an old Bunsen burner the flame will rise up above the end of the tube when you turn the throttle up as it win't burning as fast as the gas was coming out of the tube. As the gas spreads out at the end of the tube it slows down which is why it was able to burn fast enough a little above the end of the tube. The flame is then susceptible to drafts and can blow out.
So the burner end is modified with an additional ring fed by holes so some gas can slow down and ignite just above the end of the tube. This part of the flame is able to reignite the main jet.

It may just be a case of finding the design of the replaceable brass nozzle bit.

[Mark RandParticipant @markrand96270]

The nozzles are a very simple design with gas or air being admitted at the centre and air or gas being admitted via an annular hole, with both mixing in the nozzle's tube. I've just checked mine and it appears that the aluminium shroud which retains the nozzle has actually got a small radial clearance between itself and the end of the nozzle.

It's probable that the reason for this is to avoid heating the shroud, but it does leave the possibility of drilling a small radial hole into the end portion of the nozzle to allow a leak of mixture to exit via this radial gap. That would act as a flame control ring.

I've got too many other pots on the boil at the moment (See what I did there? ) But when I get the round-tuit recommissioned, I might try such a modification on a copy of a burner nozzle. That's much simpler than the design I had originally considered.

[Ian Stewart 12Participant @ianstewart12]

The Flamemaster has a few subtle details. The labels A and B indicate plungers operated by the trigger, A has much greater travel and adds ?fuel while B hardly moves and adds ?air/oxy. The mixing chamber looks remarkably similar to the Dillon.

It will be relatively easy to make new orifice pieces to screw into the base piece. The only item which may be damaged is C1 and C2, the screw is obviously a bodge and I am unsure of the details inside C1, it looks as if it is meant to be an adjustment.

[Author]

Posts