Miller Machine

[akronmarbles]

If you look....there are quite a few easy to find newspaper articles which will back this claim up.

[akronmarbles]

May 1927- hand gathering is still the name of the game.

In my opinion  - CA was the first to try and successfully utilize the fully automated process. I usually do not offer an opinion unless I have stacks of newspaper and trade journal articles to cite.

[machinemades]

Thanks for the additional info. Yes, I am aware very early on Peltier made handgathered marbles and Miller swirls could also be handgathered. Those years the companies were racing to meet the demand, inventing new machines or improving what they already have was common occurrence and they probably had few machines running parallel every day. At this point whatever I’ll say is speculation so I will leave it at that. Great discussion.

[akronmarbles]

"MIller Swirls" are fully automated IMHO. The glass constructions on these marbles clearly is from a 'stream" which shows continuity with other marbles within the same types. The race was to be the first to have a gravity fed stream with a shear fast enough to cut individual gobs at a fast rate. Faster the rate the more you produce - this is why machines eventually went duplex. The problem lays in glass conditioning - in the forehearth area where glass would make its fall into a machine-  viscosity and temperature must be perfectly dialed in. This may seem very easy now, but this was the golden goose egg for the entire glass industry at the time. Most of the solutions for this problem resulted from a cross pollination derived from the container and pressed industry. There are 100's of patents on glass feeders and glass conditioning forehearths that had nothing to do with marbles. The money for R&D was in the greater glass manufacturing industry. The other interesting part is that Arnold Fiedler worked first for Akro, then for Peltier, and finally at CA.

 

This is the rate that automation had to overcome in order to have an advantage over your competition:

Akro was still hand gathering when Peltier came onto the scene.....

[Berryb]

Wow great stuff you guys. 

Another question ; Did Pelt have a brand name for those early "miller machine" mibs?

[machinemades]

I agree millers were one of the first all machinemade marbles. Not from a technical but from a visual observation point of view handgathered - machine rounded transitional marbles have a simpler pattern and coloring, not to mention the “9” most have and Miller swirls having a spectacular elaborate patterns, Peltier must  have been very happy with what they have achieved. Problems possibly were high labor requirement, not making enough marbles per day, looking for ways to improve that and also possibly high rejection rate forced them to invent other patents and eventually create national line rainbos.

[wvrons]

Are Millers Peltier Company only ?  Are the first marbles(slags)produced by Peltier also Millers ?  Or are Millers just Peltier swirls ? Are all Peltier swirls Millers ?  

[machinemades]

Miller swirls as the collectors named it are Peltier marbles. William Miller might have designed machines for other companies but that is irrelevant. It is not proved obviously yet that he even designed the machines for miller swirls. We got your point on that one already. Early miller patents or publishings need to be studied to prove either way.

First slags by Peltier are thought to be handgathered and hard to distinguish from akro slags.

Third question seems to be same as first.

NLRs can also be swirly but the cutlines and ribbons are easily recognizable. Miller swirls do have at least one cutline. Sometimes second cutline might be visible but the cutlines are short, swirly, looking more like a fold line rather than a cutline and sometimes hard to see. Also, ribbon count is not as straight as National Line Rainbos and can be hard to count due to extreme swirling.

[cheese]

Thank you for sharing the patents... They illustrate exactly what my brain was imagining during my times of mentally reverse-engineering the pattern of many marbles and how they must have been made. I can easily see how the peltier feathered slags got their pattern and a similar process was probably used in making some of Alley's heavy flamed marbles I would think. 

I have never been involved in the making of a marble but I have a very technically oriented mind and the only way I can see the rollers influencing the pattern in any way is by curling the ingot into a sphere and the possibility of it maybe making a yin-yang or something like that if the marble somehow turns the same direction for a few revolutions while the glass is still hot. The main structure of the marble is formed before the ingot is sheared. In the second patent, you can see the receptacle where the stream collects before it drops out the second orifice to be cut. This is where is would curl and curl into a gob, making the feathered pattern or flame effect. The third patent shows the method of making the 4 or 6 finger design. Excellent, thanks again. More marble knowledge is great, I can't get enough.

[wvrons]

I am still learning but have since the first year I got into marbles. If my questions ever stop ?  It might be time for me leave marbles. 

I have the feeling that you are like so many collectors who think that there are different marble machines for different styles, types, or pattern marbles.  That is what I am not convinced of. 

I don't know when or how the Miller swirls name came from ? It was in place when I started into marbles. But The Miller swirls are the only machine made marble that I can think of that has been designated to only a certain marble machine or machines. If there is a difference in a marble machine that causes it to make swirls only ? That is what I would like to know.  Where the early Peltier slags made on the same Miller machine as the Miller Swirls ?  It is sounding like the Miller Swirls were made next or shortly after the early slags. I have also heard many times that the MCS marbles were very early. Were the MCS marbles made on the Miller swirl machine ?  If so why did they not also get the Miller Swirl name ?  I understand some about the cut line disappearing and some show on swirl type marbles.  That happens routinely with WV swirls ,Jabos, etc. So were the NLR marbles made on the Miller swirl machine or a different machine ?  

I will slow down on the questions. But probably not stop until I find my answer.  My big question has always been what was so special or different with the machine or machines that produced the named Miller Swirls ?  As of today, all the marble machine operators, past different company owners and past company employee's which took the time to answer my questions and had any knowledge of the machines. They all gave me the same answer over many years. The answers were the machine just makes the hot marble round. But none of them were ever at Peltier.  I have seen a couple Peltier Miller machines in person. I have seen at least over 50 marble machines in person. Many of those in operation. I saw no big design difference in the machine rolls other than size or the location where the hot glass entered the rolls. The machines were all from early 1930 or before up through the 1940's and the last full size one built in the USA. So I have wondered for many years what was the difference in this machine that made it produce Miller Swirls and not slags, normal ribbon style, or patch style marbles ? I am sure there are different size Miller Swirls. So there were likely more than one special Miller swirl machine. I know for a fact that you can produce patch or ribbon or swirl type marbles on the same exact machine. I have witnessed it several times and done it myself hands on. So it always confused me why Peltier would pay and probably extra for a special machine to make swirls with.  

Sorry I did not slow down much. 

For now, I will still hunt and wait for evidence of what difference there was in the special Peltier Miller machines which made Miller Swirls.  Until then for me, the marble machine just makes the hot glass glob round and aids in cooling the marble.  The design ,type, style of the marble happens upstream before the marble machine. 

Thanks for the effort and time. 

 

[Marbleized]

Actually it sort of make sense to me that the marble machine just makes the glob round and the magic happens before it shoots down the screws.  Soon after it is cut there's not much time for anything much to happen, I would imagine, since it is already starting to harden.  After watching the machine used by Jabo on a couple of YouTube videos, it seems that the patterns form probably between the point of the pour and the mixing of colored glass and chemicals, evolving until the point at which it is sheared.  So interesting.  My head is spinning like a marble in a machine.

[cheese]

I agree with you Ron, all it can do is make the marble round. The patents on the tank part both prove you're right, the pattern is made in the tank. One shows a small section where the ribbon gathers before it goes to the shears. This would create the feathered or flame pattern before it ever comes out of the tank. The other shows 6 channels for different glass to enter the stream before it exits the tank. So in those two patents, you'd have a 6 ribbon marble and a feathered or flamey marble, depending on which patent you are using. Whether the 6 ribbon marble is a swirl or not depends on how the ingot exits the tank, not the rollers. Making the marble round might curve or squish the ingot a little but I can't see how that would make it into a swirl, especially since it's been proven that swirls can be made while making patches and visa-versa just by changing alignment of the machine and/or the distance between the outlet and cutters.

[Marbleized]

Here's what is going through my novice brain--I was thinking that Peltier Rainbos look like globs of icing being forced through a pastry tube that has a bit of the previous color stuck to the inside surface of the bag. When it comes out, you have the main colored icing with a thin ribbon of the other color showing.  Sorry.  I know it sounds lame.  Just thinking out loud.