Sample Tiles

credit: Tia Murphy

There are advocates for making tiles as references for future work.  

• They show the profiles achieved at different temperatures.  
• They can be stored for easy visual reference when planning a firing.  
• It is a useful practice for any kiln new to the user.  

These tiles are assembled in identical ways to enable comparisons.  They should include black and white, iridised pieces- up and down, transparent and opal, and optionally stringers, confetti, millefiori, frit and enamels.  

The tiles are fired at different top temperatures with the same heat up schedule with the top temperature of each at about 10C or 20F intervals.  These show what effect different temperatures give.  Start the temperature intervals at about 720C or 1330F.

This is a good practice, even if time consuming.  It gets you familiar with your kiln and its operation.  It gives a reference for the profiles that are achieved with different temperatures at the rates used.

Ramp rate and time

But, as with many things in kilnforming, it is a little more complicated.  The effect you achieve is affected by rate and time used as well as the temperature.

The firing rate is almost as important as the temperature.  

• A slow rate to the same top temperature will give a different result than a fast rate.  
• The amount of heat work put into the glass will affect the temperature required.  
• Slow rates increase the time available for the glass to absorb the heat.  
• Glass absorbs heat slowly, so the longer the time used by slower rates, the rounder the profile will be.

Since time is a significant factor in achieving a given profile, any soaks/holds in the schedule will affect the profile at a set temperature.  A schedule without a bubble squeeze will give a different result than one with a bubble squeeze at the same temperature.

To help achieve knowledge of the rate/time effect, make some further test tiles.  Use different rates and soaks for the test tiles of the same nature as the first temperature tests. But vary only one of those factors at a time. Consider the results of these tests when writing the schedule for more complex or thicker layups. 

Mass

Also be aware that more mass takes longer to achieve the same profile.  Slower rates and longer times will help to achieve the desired profile at a lower temperature.  It is probably not practical to make a whole series of test tiles for thicker items.  But, a sample or two of different thicknesses and mass will be helpful to give a guide to the amount of adjustment required to achieve the desired outcome.

The results of sample tiles are due to more than just temperature.  They are a combination of rate, time, and temperature (and sometimes mass).  These factors need to be considered when devising or evaluating a schedule, because without considering those factors, it is not possible to accurately evaluate the relevance of a suggested top temperature.

See also: Low Temperature Kilnforming, available from Bullseye and Etsy

Scheduling for Thick Landscapes

Thick slabs often involve numerous firings of increasingly thick work.  I am using an existing example, with their permission, of the first stages of a thick landscape.  The initial concern was with bubbles in the first layup, then the strategy for firing the thick slab.

Plans

This is the first part of a landscape with depth.  It will be fired 5-7 more times.  This first piece will be inverted for the next firing with the clear facing up, to avoid reactions between the colours.  It is similar to an open face casting. There is a Bullseye Tip Sheet on open face casting that will give a lot of information.

Layup

Picture credit: Osnat Menshes

This work has a base of clear that is mostly overlaid with one layer of 3mm pieces, although in some places another layer, and there are some pre-fired elements as well.  It is fired on Thinfire shelf paper.

Bubbles 

There is concern about the number and size of the bubbles after the firing, and how to avoid them.  Will they grow over the multiple firings?

The many small bubbles are characteristic of kilnformed glass.  The few larger bubbles may result from the frit that is under the pieces that form the top surface.  And there are some overlaps of clear over colour that may form pockets where air can collect. I advise leaving the scattering of the frit until all the decorative pieces are in place.  The bubbles will migrate toward the top during the multiple firings.  They will not grow in size unless they combine during the upward migration.  A later suggestion about reducing the number of firings will reduce the bubble migration and risk of increasing in size.

Picture credit: Osnat Menshes

Schedule

Proposed Schedule (Temperatures in degrees Celsius)

1: 180 – 560, 30’    I would go to 610 for 30'

2: 25 – 680, 120’    I would use only 30'

3: 220 – 810, 15’    I would set the top temperature at 816, 15’.

4: 9999 – 593, 30’  Eliminate this segment. 

5: 9999 – 482, 120’ I suggest one hour soak

8: 55 – 370, off      83 – 427, 0’

7: 150 – 371, 0’

8: 330 – to room temperature, off.

 

Eliminate segment number 4.  Any temperature equalisation done at this temperature, is undone by the AFAP to the  annealing.  The temperature equalisation occurs at the annealing temperature. No soak at an intermediate temperature is required.  This blog post gives some information about annealing above and below the annealing point (Tg). 

Firing Incremental Layers

The plan is for five to seven more firings.  Continuing to build up the thickness on each firing, may have some problems.

• There is increased risk of compatibility problems when firing a piece to full fuse many times.
• There is a risk of more bubbles and of the existing ones becoming larger as they move upwards and combine with other smaller ones.
• With each firing the thickness is increasing and so becoming a longer firing.  This is because the heat up, annealing, and cooling each need to be longer.  For example - 6mm needs 3hour cooling, 12mm needs 5 hours, 19mm needs 9 hours. 

Multiple Slabs

These are the main reasons that I recommend firing a series of 6mm slabs separately and combining them in one final firing.  Firing a series of 6mm slabs and then combining them in a single long and slow final firing has advantages.

• The individual pieces do not need to go through so many full fuse firings, reducing the risk of compatibility problems.
• The small bubbles in each firing will not have the chance to rise through all the layers to become larger.
• The total time in the kiln for the combined pieces will be less than adding layers to already fired layers.

Examples

It is often difficult to convince people that firing by adding incrementally to an existing slab, longer firing times are required than by firing a group of 6mm slabs and a single combined firing of all the slabs.  I give an example to illustrate the differences.

Annealing

Assume there are to be a total of eight firings (existing 6mm slab and 3mm for each of seven more firings).  Also assume that each additional firing is of 3mm. This makes a total of 28mm.  Compare annealing and cooling times for each firing:

Firing      thickness       anneal and cool (hours minimum)

1            6mm                    3

2            9mm                    4

3            12mm                   5

4            15mm                   7

5            18mm                   9

6            21mm                   11.5

7            25mm                   14

8            28mm                   17

Total                                   70.5 hours annealing time (minimum)

To fire up 5 six millimetre slabs takes less time – 3 hours annealing and cooling time for each firing cumulates to 15 hours.  Add to that the final firing of 17 hours annealing time.  A total of 32 hours.  This is half the time of adding to the existing slab at each firing.  Multiple 6mm slabs can be fired at the one time if there is space in the kiln, which would reduce the kiln time for the 6mm slabs even further. 

An additional advantage of firing 6mm slabs and combining them, is that bubbles can be squeezed out more easily in the final thick slab fring because of the combined weight of the  slabs.  You could make the individual slabs a little thicker, but that would involve damming each slab.  Not an impossible task of course.  And it would change the calculations, by reducing the number of firings.

Heat Up

Another time saving is to use the second cooling rate from the Bullseye document Annealing Thick Slabs as the first up ramp rate. Take this rate up to a minimum of 540˚C. Although, this is an arbitrary temperature above the strain point to ensure all the glass is above the brittle phase.  It is possible to maintain this initial rate to the bubble squeeze.  But with the slow rises in temperature required for thicker slabs, it is sensible to increase the rate from 540 to bubble squeeze to reduce the firing time.  Once past the bubble squeeze a more rapid rate can be used to the top temperature.  

The heat up times could be about half the minimum cooling times.

A worked example (with certain assumptions) would be:

Firing      thickness       time to top temperature total time.

1            6mm             6.3               

2            9mm             7.1

3            12mm            8.4

4            15mm            10.7

5            18mm            15.9

6            21mm            19.4

7            25mm            25.1

8            28mm            29.1              ca.122 hours

But firing five times for 6mm equals 31.5 hours plus the final firing up of 29.1 hours equals a total of 60.6 hours.  Again about one half the time of progressively building up a base slab to the final thickness.

Savings

This example shows that approximately 90 hours of firing time can be saved by making a series of six millimetre slabs and combining them in a final firing.  There is the additional advantage of reducing the occurrence of bubbles between the layers in the final firing because of the weight of the combined slabs.

Heat Up Soaks

Photo credit: Bullseye Glass Co.

It is often advocated that there should be a soak at the strain point to even out the temperature throughout the glass.

My question continues to be why? 

The glass has survived whatever rate has been used up to that point during its brittle phase.  So, it already has every chance of surviving a rapid rate during the plastic phase.

Instead of a soak at the strain point, Bob Leatherbarrow indicates a soak during the brittle phase will be more successful in avoiding heat up breaks.  He has observed that heat up breaks are most likely to happen around 260ºC/500ºF.  Therefore, a soak in that region is most likely to be of use in evenly distributing the heat effectively through the glass rather than at a higher temperature.  He recommends up to a half hour soak there before proceeding at the same rate to the strain point (about 540ºC/1004ºF).  The ramp rate to this heat up soak in the brittle phase should be related to the thickness of the glass and the intended profile.

The thickness to be fired for is determined by the profile.  Rates for full and contour fusing can be as for the thickness before firing.  Rounded tack fuse needs to be fired as though twice as thick, and sharp tack or laminated fuse need to be fired as though 2.5 times.  More information on initial ramp rates to the strain point can be found in Low Temperature Kilnforming available from Bullseye and from Etsy

Diagnosing Slump fractures

Once you have an initial idea of the source of the problem, think about it.  Test it against the evidence.  Is there enough evidence to make a call?  Make sure you have considered alternative explanations.  It is just too easy to make a snap decision about causes in low temperature processes.  The source of breaks in slumping are most often complex and stem from interrelated factors.

I give you an example of the difficulties of diagnosing a slumping break.

On a Facebook group a person showed the break of a single layer on a cyclone mould.  Others commented the same had happened to them.

Picture credit: Esther Mulvihill Pickens

Possible causes suggested on Facebook included:

• Thermal shock on the way up
• Thermal shock on the way down
• Too large on the mould and broke due to differential contraction
• Too many holds on the way up
• Too hot
• Too thin
• Follow the CPI programme
• Glass extending over the sides

Some of these suggestions were of general applicability, some in relation to the state of the broken glass.

The suggestions did not include:

• Cause of the rounded dots at the bottom of the mould.
• A cause for the state of the flat piece off the mould (it appears sharp edged.  Does it show some forming already?).
• The cause for the location of the fully formed remaining glass.
• The effect of the location of the mould and glass in the kiln.
• The consequences of a short soak at top temperature. 
• Is the kiln running hotter than most (1290ºF/698ºC for 10 minutes at top temperature was used)?

Of course, it is difficult to diagnose a problem from just one picture. It is difficult even with many pictures. And so, without handling the object, only suggestions can be made.

But….

You must spend enough time examining the piece with whatever other information is available to make specific suggestions.  The first thought may not consider all the factors.  Consider what kinds of causes there are for breaks during or after slumping.

More close inspection reveals the rounded edges of the break.  That supports the idea that the temperature was too high. It also supports the diagnosis that the break occurred on the heat up.

The edges of the piece that has fallen off the mould, and now rests on the shelf, seem to be square or sharp. This shows the extent of the difference of temperature between shelf and top of the mould – less than 100mm/4 inches.  Also, how small the differences in temperature are between slump and tack.  The extent of difference in fusing does depend on how high in the kiln the mould is placed.  That is demonstrated here by the different elevation of the two pieces. 

The conformation of the glass to the mould is complete.  This supports the diagnosis of the break occurring early in the firing, and certainly before the slump was complete.  These pieces will not fit together.  So, even if the edges were sharp the fact they will not fit together shows they conformed independently to the mould surface.  Therefore, the break was before forming temperature was reached.

The glass hangs over the mould edges on only three sides and at an angle.  This indicates the cause of the overhang was the break.  Not the reverse. An overhang at the beginning of the slump is likely to be even.

The piece on the floor of the kiln combined with the movement of the glass toward the back gives an indication that the origin of the break is at the front.  This relates to uneven temperatures and to the placement of the mould.

No one mentioned the placement of the mould and glass at the back of the kiln.  This will have an effect on scheduling.  The mould and glass are very large in relation to the kiln.  There is little space between the glass on the mould and the walls of the kiln.  Also, the mould is placed asymmetrically in the kiln – very close on three sides.  This will cause uneven heating in any kiln.  To have a successful firing of glass on this mould in this kiln will require radically different schedules to that for a centrally placed mould that is moderate for the size of the kiln.

The large size (relative to the kiln) and the asymmetrical placing are the causes of the break, in my opinion.  I admit that it took me several looks to realise the placement was a key cause of the break.

So, the generalised comments about thermal shock are correct, but not as to the cause of that shock.  The kiln will be hotter in the central part and cooler at the corners.  This is true of all rectangular kilns.  The important thing is to learn how to cope with these temperature differences.

Slow firings to low temperatures with long soaks are the three important elements.  These make up the heat work of the kiln. Applying this to a schedule means:

• slow ramp up rates – as little as one half the recommended rates for centrally placed moulds that are moderately sized in relation to the kiln.
• Low temperatures present lesser risks to the control of the outcome of the firing.  Determining the lower temperature possible requires peeking into the kiln to monitor the progress of the firing.
• Long soaks combined with low temperatures get the kilnforming done with minimal marking of the underside.  Low temperature soaks - in excess of 30 minutes - are required to minimise the marking.  Observation of the slump will be necessary to determine when it is complete.

My suggestions for the causes of other elements are:

·        Cause of the rounded dots at the bottom of the mould.

The temperature was too high. 698ºC/1290ºF is much hotter than needed for a slump. It was hot enough to round edges and small shards of glass.  Which shows excessive heat was received by the glass.

·        A cause for the state of the flat piece off the mould (it appears sharp edged. Does it show some forming already?)

The soak of 10 minutes was too short for the temperature in the kiln to equalise from top to bottom.  The glass on the shelf may not have reached 650ºC/1200ºF with such a short soak.

·        The cause for the location of the fully formed remaining glass.

The glass broke and was forced apart by the size of the expansion differences within the glass.  The movement of a piece at the front of the mould combined with the rearward and side movement of the glass indicate the origin of the break was at the front.  The distance apart shows the amount of force, and so the degree of reduction in the ramp rate required to fire this successfully.

·        The effect of the location of the mould and glass in the back of the kiln has already been discussed.

·         The consequences of a short soak at top temperature.

A high temperature is often considered necessary to pick up all the detail in moulds, whether slump or texture moulds.  The same effect can be achieved at lower temperatures with longer soaks.  The results of this strategy are fewer mould marks on the bottom of the work.

·        Is the kiln running hotter than most (Used 1290F/698C for 10 minutes at top temperature)?

This is one that cannot be answered other than by experiments carried out by the owner of the kiln.  Look at the Bullseye Tech Note #1 Knowing your Kiln for methods of testing temperatures. 

In short:

Diagnosis of slumping breaks is more complex than it appears at first.

More information is available in the eBook Low Temperature Kilnforming, an Evidence Based Approach to Scheduling.

This is available from Bullseye or Etsy

Heat Up vs Annealing

I am amazed by the effort put into ramp up rates, bubble squeezes, and top temperatures in comparison to annealing.  The emphasis on social media groups seems to be to get the right ramp rates for tack fuses and slumps, bubble squeezes, etc.  Most of the attention is on the way up to processing temperature.

The treatment of annealing and cooling is almost cavalier by comparison.  The attention seems to be on what temperature, and how long a soak is needed.  Then some arbitrary rate is used to cool to 370ºC/700ºF.

Annealing, in comparison to firing to top temperature, is both more complex and more vital to getting sound, lasting projects completed.  Skimping on annealing is an unsound practice leading to a lot of post-firing difficulties.

Annealing is more than a temperature and a time.  It is also the cooling to avoid inducing temporary stress. That stress during cooling can be large enough to break the glass.  This temporary stress is due to expansion differentials within the glass.

People often cite the saving of electricity as the reason for turning off at 370ºC/700ºF.  My response is that if the kiln is cooling off slower than the rate set, there will be no electricity used.  No electricity demands.  No controller intervention.  No relay operation.

Annealing at the lower end of the range with a three-stage cooling provides good results.  The results of Bullseye research on annealing are shown in their chart for annealing thick items.  It applies to glass 6mm and much larger.  It results from a recommendation to anneal at the lower end of the annealing range to get good anneals.  Other industrial research shows annealing in the lower end gives denser glass, and by implication, more robust glass.  Wissmach have accepted the results of Bullseye research and now recommend 482ºC/900ºF as the annealing temperature for their W96.  The annealing point of course remains at 516ºC/960ºF.

Bullseye research goes on to show that a progressive cooling gives the best results.  They recommend a three-stage cooling process.  The first is for the initial 55ºC/º100F below the annealing temperature, a second 55ºC/100ºF cooling and a final cooling to room temperature.

It is a good practice to schedule all three cooling rates.  It may be considered unnecessary because your kiln cools slower than the chart indicates.  Well, that is fine until you get into tack and contour fusing.  Then you will need the three-stage cooling process as you will be annealing for thicknesses up to 2.5 times actual height.

 

Of course, you can find out all the reasons for careful annealing in my book "Annealing; concepts, principles, practice" Available from Bullseye at

https://classes.bullseyeglass.com/ebooks/ebook-annealing-concepts-principles-practice.html

Or on Etsy in the VerrierStudio shop

https://www.etsy.com/uk/listing/1290856355/annealing-concepts-principles-practice?click_key=d86e32604406a8450fd73c6aabb4af58385cd9bc%3A1290856355&click_sum=9a81876e&ref=shop_home_active_4

Scheduling with the Bullseye Annealing Chart

This post is about adapting the Bullseye chart Annealing Thick Slabs to write a schedule for any soda lime glass as used in kilnforming.

I frequently recommend that people should use the Bullseye chart for Annealing Thick Slabs in Celsius  and Fahrenheit.  This chart applies to glass from 6mm to 200mm (0.25” to 8”).

“Why should the Bullseye annealing chart be used instead of some other source?  I don’t use Bullseye.”

My answer is that the information in the chart is the most thoroughly researched set of tables for fusing compatible glass that is currently available.  This means that the soak times and rates for the thicknesses can be relied upon.

“How can it be used for glass other than Bullseye?”  

The rates and times given in the chart work for any soda lime glass, even float. It is only some of the temperatures that need to be changed.

"How do I do that?"  

My usual response is: substitute the annealing temperature for your glass into the one given in the Bullseye table.

 "It’s only half a schedule."

That is so.  The heating of glass is so dependent on layup, size, style, process, and purpose of the piece.  This makes it exceedingly difficult to suggest a generally applicable firing schedule.  People find this out after using already set schedules for a while. What works for one layup does not for another.

Devising a Schedule for the Heat Up

There is no recommendation from the chart on heat up.  You have to write your own schedule for the first ramps.  I can give some general advice on some of the things you need to be aware of while composing your schedule.

The essential element to note is that the Bullseye chart is based on evenly thick pieces of glass.  Tack fusing different thicknesses of glass across the piece, requires more caution. The practical process is to fire as for thicker pieces.  The amount of additional thickness is determined by the profile being used.  The calculation for addition depends on the final profile.  The calculation for thickness is as follows:

• Contour fusing - multiply the thickest part by 1.5. 
• Tack fusing - multiply the thickest part by 2. 
• Sharp tack or sinter - multiply the thickest part by 2.5.

The end cooling rate for the appropriate thickness is a guide for the first ramp rate of your schedule.  For example, the final rate for an evenly thick piece 19mm/0.75” is 150ºC/270ºF.  This could be used as the rate for the first ramp. 

Bob Leatherbarrow has noted that most breaks occur below 260ºC/500ºF.  If there are multiple concerns, more caution can be used for the starting ramp rate.  My testing shows that using a rate of two thirds the final rate of cooling with a 20 minute soak is cautious.  In this example of a 19mm piece it would be 100ºC/180ºF per hour.

Even though for thinner pieces the rates given are much faster, be careful.  It is not advisable to raise the temperature faster than 330ºC/600ºF per hour to care for both the glass and the kiln shelf.

Once the soak at 260ºC//500ºF is finished, the ramp to the bubble squeeze should maintain the previous rate.  It should not be speeded up.  The glass is still in the brittle phase.

After the bubble squeeze you can use a ramp rate to the top temperature of up to 330C/600F.   AFAP rates to top temperature are not advisable.  It is difficult to maintain control of the overshoots in temperature that are created by rapid rates.  

The top temperature should be such as to achieve the result in 10 minutes to avoid problems that can occur with extended soaks at top temperature.

In the example of an evenly thick 19mm/0.75” piece a heat up full fuse schedule like this could be used:

• 150ºC/270ºF to 566ºC/1052ºF for 0 minutes
• 50C/90F to 643C/1191F for 30 minutes
• 333ºC/600ºF to 804ºC/1479ºF for 10 minutes

 

If a more cautious approach to the heat up is desired, this might be the kind of schedule used:

 

• 100ºC/180ºF to 260ºC/500ºF for 20 minutes
• 100ºC/180ºF to 566ºC/1052ºF for 0 minutes
• 50C/90F to 643ºC/1191ºF for 30 minutes
• 333ºC/600ºF to 804ºC/1479ºF for 10 minutes

This approach is applicable to all fusing glasses.

 

Adapting the Bullseye Annealing Chart

After writing the first part of the schedule, you can continue to apply the annealing information from the Bullseye chart.  The first part of the anneal cooling starts with dropping the temperature as fast as possible to the annealing temperature.

The method for making the chart applicable to the annealing is a matter of substitution of the temperature.  All the other temperatures and rates apply to all fusing glasses.

Use the annealing temperature from your source as the target annealing  temperature in place of the Bullseye one.  The annealing soak times are important to equalise the temperature within the glass to an acceptable level (ΔT=5ºC).  The annealing soak time is related to the calculated thickness of the piece.  This measurement is done in the same way as devising the appropriate rate for heat up. 

Applying the Cooing Rates

Then apply the rates and temperatures as given in the chart.  The three stage cooling is important.  The gradually increasing rates keep the temperature differentials within acceptable bounds with the most rapid and safe rates.

The temperatures and rates remain the same for all soda lime glasses – the range of glass currently used in fusing, including float glass.  The soak time for the calculated thickness of your glass piece will be the same as in the Bullseye chart.  

This means that the first cooling stage will be to 427ºC/800ºF.  The second stage will be from 427ºC/800ºF to 371ºC/700˚F.  And the final stage will be from 371ºC/700˚F to room temperature.

I will repeat, because it is so important, that the thickness to be used for the anneal soak and cooling rates for your schedule relates to the profile you desire.  A fuse with even thickness across the whole piece can use the times, temperatures, and rates as given in the chart as adapted for your glass.  The thicknesses to use are for:

Contour fusing - multiply the thickest part by 1.5. 

Tack fusing - multiply the thickest part by 2. 

Sharp tack or sinter - multiply the thickest part by 2.5.

An annealing cool schedule for 19mm/0.75" Oceanside glass is like this:

• AFAP to 510˚C/ 951˚F for 3:00 hours
• 25˚C/45˚F to 427˚C/800˚F for 0 time
• 45˚C/81˚F to 371˚C/700˚F for 0 time
• 150˚C/270˚F to room temperature, off.

Many will wish to turn off the kiln as early as possible.  This is not part of best kilnforming practice.  If you still wish to do this, the turn off temperature must be related to the thickness and nature of the piece.  To turn off safely, you need to know the cooling characteristics of your kiln.  This can be determined by observing the temperature against time and then calculating the kiln’s natural cooling rate. And then applying that information to cooling the kiln.

 

The best source for devising schedules is the Bullseye chart for Annealing Thick Slabs.  It is well researched and is applicable with little work to develop appropriate schedules for all the fusing glasses currently in use.

 

 

Stuck Kiln Wash

 

Moulds

Kiln wash on ceramic moulds lasts a very long time. But sometimes you want to use a different separator. First you need to prepare yourself and the area for the process.

Preparation

It is best to wear a mask while removing kiln wash or other separators to reduce the amount of dust you inhale. Wearing an apron or other outer wear will keep the dust off your clothing.

Spread a cloth, newspaper or other covering around the area. This is to be able to easily gather the removed kiln wash and place it in the waste.  Have a vacuum sweeper at hand to remove powder rather than blowing it around the workspace.  Of course, if you can do this outside, there is much smaller risk of contamination.

Removal Methods

The method of removing kiln wash depends in part on what the mould material is.

Metal

You can sandblast, manually sand, or wash off the kiln wash from metal moulds.

Ceramic

Sandblasting is not a safe method for ceramics, as it is so easy to damage the surface of the mould. Removing the kiln wash while dry is a good first approach. It saves having to wait long times for air drying and long kiln drying of the damp mould. You can lightly sand off the kiln wash from smooth surfaced moulds, and for detailed areas use rounded point wood and plastic tools. This can be backed up with a stiff nylon brush to clear out the narrow or detailed areas.

When these dry methods are insufficient, there are wet approaches. I recommend dampening the kiln wash rather than immersing the mould in water. The same tools can be used as for the dry removal.

Soaking or washing the mould does not remove the kiln wash as easily as you might think.  It is especially to be avoided where the mould has an internal hollow, as it may take days to dry sufficiently to apply other separators.  To put it in the kiln risks breaking the mould by the steam build up during the initial rise in temperature.

If you must soak the mould, I recommend that you use a 5% solution of citric acid because it has a chelating action on the kiln wash.

More information on removing kiln wash from moulds.

Remember that once the mould or shelf has been coated with boron nitride, it is almost impossible to go back to kiln wash again.  The boron nitride irreversibly fills the porous element of the ceramic, making it difficult for the kiln wash to adhere to the mould.

Shelves

The easiest surfaces to remove kiln wash from are flat or ones nearly so.

Dry Methods

Abrasive methods work well with a variety of tools. They can range from large paint scrapers to smaller ones with a Stanley blade inserted. 

 

Coarse open mesh plaster board (dry wall) sanding sheets are very useful. There are frames that you can fix them to, but sanding without the frame works well too.

Using power tools to sand the shelf is not advisable.  It is too easy to remove lots of material, including the surface of the shelf – even the hard, ceramic ones.  This leads to minor depressions in the shelf and consequent bubble difficulties when firing.

Do not be tempted to sandblast either, as that can easily create the small depressions in the surface of the shelf that subsequently lead to bubbles. 

Wet methods

Wet methods can be used if you are concerned about the dustiness of the process.  You can dampen the kiln wash on the shelf and sand or scrape as with the dry methods.  You will create a paste or slurry which can be bagged and put in the waste. You can also use the green scrubby washing up pads.  Unless you frequently rinse the pads, the kiln wash builds up and clogs the pads. making them ineffective.

 

Some people use vinegar or chemicals such as lime away with the water. The material that makes the kiln wash stick to the shelf is China clay and the separator is alumina hydrate. Both of these elements are almost impervious to the chemicals available to kiln workers. Instead, use citric acid. It has a chelating action which will incorporate the particles of the kiln wash. This will require some scrubbing, but avoids the smells of vinegar and the risks of other chemicals.

Do not be tempted to use pressure washers. Yes, they will remove the kiln wash. But it will also leave divots in the shelf which will cause later problems with bubble creation.

A big drawback to using wet methods, is that the shelf becomes wetted throughout and needs careful drying before use. 

Both the wet and dry methods can be used on smooth, gentle curved moulds. These include wave moulds, shallow moulds without flat bottoms, cylinder moulds, and such like.

More information on Kiln Wash Removal from shelves is available here,

and here.

Boron Nitride

A note on the reversibility of boron nitride. This is sold under a variety of trade names such as Zyp, More, MR97, etc., and sometimes under its chemical name.

Some people are applying boron nitride to ceramic moulds for the "smoother" surface.  Boron nitride is an excellent separator for metal moulds and casting moulds whether metal or ceramic. But it has limitations, including the price and the requirement for a new coating at each firing.  Some are beginning to wonder if they can go back to kiln wash after having used the boron nitride.

The general experience has been that you can't apply kiln wash on top of the boron nitride. It just beads up and flows off, because the boron nitride creates a non-wetting surface that survives relatively high temperatures. The kiln wash which is in water suspension has no opportunity to adhere to the mould.

The most accepted way to get rid of the boron nitride is by sandblasting. Sandblasting risks pitting the mould. Manual sanding seems to enable the ceramic mould to accept kiln wash. Perhaps enough of the surface is removed to reveal the porous nature of the ceramic mould. You do need to be cautious about taking the surface of the mould away when using abrasive removal methods. The ceramic is relatively soft in relation to the abrasive materials.

The difficulty of removing boron nitride from ceramic moulds means that you must think carefully about which moulds you coat with it.  If the mould has delicate or fine detail, removing the boron nitride risks the removal of the detail.  This indicates that this kind of mould, once coated, should not be taken back to the bare mould.

If you are using boron nitride to get a smoother surface to the object, consider using a lower slumping or draping temperature. This will minimise mould marks very effectively. And without the expense of boron nitride.

More information on removal of boron nitride is given here. 

More information about mould treatment is available in the ebook: Low Temperature Kiln Forming and at Bullseye ebooks