Mf Christensen Red Slags

[Road Dog]

Robert Block and Baumann describe the early machine and shear process in his book. It was single gather and one marble at a time. So the Shear would only be on one pole of each marble. It makes sense the tails would be towards the shear mark because of how they turned and handled the gather.

[mon]

Oh no...another book I don't have.........or maybe I do......?

Edition 4 by Robert Block describes nothing about single gathered marbles but does state the following that I was not aware of: "Later M.F. Christensen marbles do not have pontils. This is probably due to refinements in glass temperatures and timing, rather than improvements in the machinery."

And, "....keeping the glass on the end of the punty as a stream was allowed to drip into the machine."

[Road Dog]

Robert Block's book " Collecting Early Machine-made Marbles" (The M.F. Christensen & Son Company and Christensen Agate Company)

Here is a pic of a shear mark on a 13/16" Red Slag I have.

[mon]

Galen, I reread your changes and think if the big glob was off the end of the punty, you would be correct. But think if it was back on the punty providing resistance, the unsupported glob at the end could be controlled by this resistance and gravity. Do you see that both ends would technically have two cut marks if the tail was not so long as to be cut with the other? But the first cut would be anywhere on the surface (at the end of the tail) and not at the opposite end of the last cut mark.

Road, I don't have that book and believe you but think it's in error. As Brian describes, multi marbles from one glob and how the tail is formed sound more like it. Just think about it.....wouldn't it be harder to gather one marble worth of glass at a time as to a big glob? Look at some tails.....some are smooth and some are not due to cooling from multiple marbles from a glob.

[Road Dog]

Baumann describes it as a single gather in his book as well, but the way it is written in both books it doesn't say if multiple marbles were from a single gather or not. So it may be possible.

[mon]

I see, RoadD.........take honey on a spoon, rod or whatever....dip it in two inches then tip it forward and you can control how much you drip of the end by tilting back and spinning if necessary....is the best visual I can think of.

[migbar]

I would expect each gather to yield several marbles, but I do not know for certain from documentation.

[Road Dog]

In Baumann's book he writes the early machine could only round one marble at a time. He also writes a pair of workers could make 10,000 marbles in a ten hour day. I think that comes to about 1 marble every 7-8 seconds.

[mon]

In the photo mig posted, a team would operate multiple machines at one time and rounding one at a time per machine. I thought maybe the first off would be on the largest size set up due to the glob was under less control then adjusted as what size to feed depending on the temp and size of the glob....but as mig pointed out..this is not supported by any documentation! lol

7-8 seconds sounds more like it and not sure if Cohill mentioned shift length?

[lstmmrbls]

3 seconds x 10,000= 30,000 seconds 8x60x60= 28,8000 seconds, = less than 3 seconds per marble, and that would be 8 hours non-stop no breaks nothing but swirling holding over the machine getting it sheared and going in for another gather. With lunch, pee breaks, glass pot refills, stuck marbles ect I figure maybe a 10 hour shift. with no breaks in 10 hrs I think it works out to 3.6 seconds per marble. Great discussion guys and gals.

I imagine multiple machines were needed as they could gather and shear much faster than a single machine would take for a marble to get hard enough to force the rollers open and drop through hard enough to stay perfectly round and get no pull marks on them. I do a great impression of a gatherer that is fairly amusing but you have to have been at a marble show when I am having this discussion to see it.

Also that glass is pretty darn hot and liquid. It comes off in one glob. I believe they were not standing at a furnace but a pot of molten glass brought to each gatherer. It had to be very molten so many marbles could be consistently gathered. This was a spectacularly quick non stop repetitious action that I do not believe would be altered now and then to let extra glass run off the punty. I think It would slow everything down way too much......just thinking

And I still say a double cut marble would have 2 shear marks No tail and no 9 Just no way around that.

[migbar]

I suspect that hot glass might be thicker, and less liquidy than Galen implies, and that perhaps spinning the punty would prevent the gob from dripping so readily, and offer some control, allowing a larger gather to fill rollers of a whole bank of machines. (maybe)

[mon]

Here is a VERY lame attempt at what I see going on. Sorry for the scratched up golf ball cube. I tried to find the least white marble.. thanks VT it is one of yours

1) A straighter edged bottom of the arc nine like the beaut Craig posted:

1a) Cube

2) Area were the white on the surface ends and is pulled inside by gravity and resistance (represented with black tape). I believe this is formed by tilting the glob forward to make the next marble from the glob and the tail already exist from either the gather tail or the previous marble tail as Brian explains.

2a) The arrows are meant to show the movement of glass and the pulling of the white inside.

3) Not a very good start of the tail on this marble but it is there. This would be the 1st cut mark Galen asked for and the other side of this cut mark would be on the butt or 2nd cut of the marble removed before.

3a)

4) This would be teardrop end attached to the punty and cut of ripped off and the other end is the start tail of the next marble attached to the glob. This one is sheared.

4a)

[mon]

This pulling of the white inside is more often than not, located closer to one side and not down the center. This is cause by the tilt and not straight up and down when controlling the next marble glob. I'm not sure how this diving of the white could happen if the gather was mostly off the end of the punty from the get?

[lstmmrbls]

I think that diving occurs as the glass slides off the punty. I have to believe that both sides of the shear in the glass will look pretty similar if not almost identical.. So the 9 side of the second marble would look almost exactly like the shear side of the first. Then you get no nine on the other side but another shear mark So if another glob does come off it will have another shear mark on the other side. But please keep going as I am trying real hard to see how more than one marble may have been possible. But at this time I just can't see how the second marble would not have 2 shear marks, keeping in mind the speed of the process and how the glass flows off a punty. I think we would be seeing a completely different marbles for the second if 2 were made from the same gather.

Now we may be helping me see how there are single seam and 2 seam marbles nearly identical are possible from CAC. I have a very knowledgeable marble maker trying to convince me that most of the CACs (except the swirls) were handgathered marbles. And this discussion is getting me to at least listen a little harder towards that possibility. But I am still way far away from being convinced

Come on Mikey, your worse than I am at giving some details. Give it a go.

I type so slow I lose track of what I am trying to say while I am hunting and pecking. (LOL)

[migbar]

I also suspect that a revolving punty with a larger gather, would tend to obscure the cut marks of the previous marble.

[mon]

Galen, don't know if I can explain it any better?

On a machine feed machine it's a stream of glass, cylindrical and being chop like a slug of tubing. In this case, the cut lines would be close in form and appearance as the other end. With a hand gather, it's not cylindrical. Ball an end of taffy and pull it from the balled end. It stretches thinner and thinner with a taper forming and the tapering back towards the original chunk of taffy. Cut cut off the ball and wrap the tapered glass back on to the original chunk of taffy. Now that cut mark is anywhere on the surface and another be made. It would have a myriad of shapes but by turning it back on.... it would be the start of the next nine.

[lstmmrbls]

Sorry Mon but your way of seeing it eliminates the possibility of a nice long shear mark usually seen on these marbles. I don't see how they would have a shear mark with your explanation. The tail we see is not from the cut side of the glob. It is what often strings out of the pot as the gather is drawn out of the pot,

And Mike, wouldn't the shear at least result in the lack of a distinct 9 on the second marble.

I believe Brian can explain how the nine is on the side of the glob that is last to leave the molten glass and the tail is the string that follows

My whole theory is because of the speed they were made. If you want to introduce a capturing devise(which I think Mike believes in) and remove the need for speed quite a lot would be possible, even swirls, Look at McCormicks marbles. But the Nine and tail with a shear mark would completely disappear

[mon]

How? Cutting that end of tail stretched out has no effect on the glob.......if I have a ball of string and pull some off and cut it, did I change the design of the wrapped ball other than what was removed. The tail would be the strand I taped back any where on the ball

[lstmmrbls]

Sorry Mon I do not see where the shear mark is with your explanation. Here is drawing of how it was all explained to me by a glass artist. And it makes perfect sense to me. The punty is not spun in hand but held tight and swirled to gather glass. The pulley like thing uner the punty at the right is the rounding machine. I wish Brian would contribute here!!! I may be way off base.

[migbar]

I'm not sure what you mean by a capturing device, but I do know that at MFC the gobs were cut to land in a small half-round cup, that was then dumped into the set of rollers.

(as seen in the first photo I posted of the MFC factory.)

[mon]

I see the same thing but believe that a larger glob is gathered up the punty and it falling off the end, as you show, time and time again. Much faster by removing the numerous dips. Both would give the same results. Sorry Galen....Visit Brian's dwg again and he talks of the next marble from a glob and how it would not effect the next nine. I think he has hand gathered a few very nice marbles.......

I'm not sure what you mean by a capturing device, but I do know that at MFC the gobs were cut to land in a small half-round cup, that was then dumped into the set of rollers.

I think you can see it in the photo you posted....first team.

[lstmmrbls]

Mike can you blow that up, It looks like a huge cup thing he is holding. Maybe full of molten glass to help speed up the process. If it was a type of measuring device for catching the proper amount of glass I would think it would be much smaller, Or do you have verification that they used such a device??

[mon]

Galen, I think it's a hinged funnel guide to accurately drop the blob in the machine. He would shear with his other hand.......

[lstmmrbls]

I think you got the item Mon!!!!!, So without three hands we would have to eliminate the scissors or Mikes cup thingy

I do see Brian is talking about reworking glass on the Punty. Again not something I believe would have been done in the speed needed for the process, And there was no torch or furnace near by and no marvers to use his process IMO. But you guys are gaining a little bit in that potholed highway I have in my brain. Thanks so much for putting up with my sometimes overbearing way of posting my ideas. I know it often comes off like I am a know it all( and I have to admit I kind of am(LOL)) but I am just looking for good discussions (or great arguements.}. I wish more would play.

And not like at AAM where a bunch of newbies seem to bow down to any one that posts knowledgeably and decent disagreements with a select group are not allowed at all.

Now I am gong to have to try and schedule some time back at the local glass company. http://benicianglass.com/ They make some killer paperweights and one artist made me a couple marbles years ago. I have met David at this studiohttp://www.lindsayartglass.com/ but have not spent any time there.

[migbar]

It was not a hinged funnel guide. It was a small block with a half sphere hole in it, the size of a marble, and a handle attached to the block. The size of the half-round hole in the block corresponded to the size of the marble being made. Size 0 and size 1 marbles would usually have a battery of six machines, and there could be as many as 10 or 12 machines involved in making the larger size 8 or size 12 marbles, because they took longer to cool, before they could be released from the machines. The furnace was located one step away from the gatherer.

(Galen.... I don't consider you a know it all...)