David said I might have further information, but I regret that I can add little. 

Where we do have standing blast furnace remains, what we see is inevitably the final state of the furnace.  Substantial building work had to be undertaken in relining the furnace after each blast, so that the possibility that the height of the furnace was altered cannot be ruled out.  When a furnace was out of blast for a significant period (as perhaps in the case of Gunsmill), it is hard to know how substantial the rebuilding works were.   I have not carried out any survey of the heights of furnaces, and thus have no means of dissenting from the opinions expressed by others. 

Some of the surviving furnaces (though 18^th century ones) have a parapet around the mouth of the furnace.  While this would partly be a safety measure, the functional top of the furnace would be the top of the wall, though the bulk of the stack would be two to three feet lower.  Could this be a means of reconciling the conflict in the heights? It would be a question of whether you measured to the top of the stack or the top of the parapet (which may not survive). 

With the introduction of coke blast furnaces, there may have been an increase in furnace height, particularly in south Wales.  Improvements in foundry technology made it possible to channel air from a single blowing machine to a second tuyere and even a third one.  This depended on being able to produce pressure tight joints in cast iron pipes.  I am not convinced that we have yet fully resolved the chronological issues over these two developments. 

I think I addressed them briefly in chapter 3 of my thesis: pp. 56-7 and 66-7 in the hard copy.  You should be able to locate the thesis on a website, if you google my full name Peter Wickham King.  If citing it from that source, say that it is from there, as the pagination of the electronic version differs slightly from the hard copy in one chapter.   

Peter King

49, Stourbridge Road,

Hagley

Stourbridge

West Midlands

DY9 0QS

[log in to unmask]

From: Arch-Metals Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Cranstone
Sent: 16 June 2011 11:02
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: 1621 Blast Furnace Height

Hi Lyle,

Here is a reply from Ian Standing.  His heights for Dean blast furnaces are rather greater than Paul Rondelez's for Ireland, which is interesting.  He does not mention any plans or photos, though there must be some. (my own photos show it completely covered with scaffolding, so not much use to you).  It may be worth your while following this up with Ian - I'm afraid I'm up to my ears with other things,so mustn't get sidetracked into this!

all the best,

David

From: Ian Standing <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: RE: 1621 Blast Furnace Height
To: "'David Cranstone'" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thursday, 16 June, 2011, 9:33

Hi David

The 1635 surveys of Dean CBFs [charcoal blast furnaces] indicate  heights of 22-24 ft.  Schubert  deals with this and is much reprinted in Hart’s Industrial History of Dean,  Henry Powle’s survey in the 1670s gives height as 28ft – so take your pick.  The idea of an exact size to prevent compacting the charge is possible, but I’ve not heard it mentioned before.

John Berkeley I think came from the ancient Lords of Berkeley family at (surprisingly) Berkeley Castle in Glos – an important family with close connection to the Crown over several centuries. There is a biography by Canon Gethyn Jones  .

About 30 years ago HMS member Arthur Dunne of Canada researched the Berkley plantation site in search of the iron making.  It will be written up somewhere – but the only ref I remember is in a Glos Local History Bulletin which I have somewhere.  Dunne visited HMS Conferences, Berkeley and nearby Tortworth  Glos where a furnace may have stood.  .   From memory, Dunn found no trace or evidence for a blast furnace on the American Berkley site – only bloomery slag.

I met Arthur Dunne once or twice, and a nephew came to see me a couple of years ago about Tortworth.   I think Amina Chatwin will have corresponded much more with him- might be worth talking to her.

Regards  Ian

--- On Thu, 16/6/11, Lyle E. Browning <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

From: Lyle E. Browning <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: 1621 Blast Furnace Height
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Thursday, 16 June, 2011, 3:11

Thanks, David, for the info. If there are photos or plans of the furnace showing some detail, life would be good.

Lyle

On Jun 15, 2011, at 5:31 PM, David Cranstone wrote:

Hi Lyle,

The obvious parallel would be Gunn's Mill furnace, Gloucestershire, built  c1625 - so about as close as you can get!  The furnace survives - the best references I've found on a very quick google is http://www.ashacentre.org/page314.html , which includes a photo, and http://hist-met.org/hmsnews46.pdf , which gives the dimensions of the bellows wheel (but not of the actual furnace.  The timber framing was thought to be from a later conversion to a paper mill, but I believe recent dendro dating has shown it to be either original or from a 1680s rebuild. 

Peter King may well have more detailed information, and I've also forwarded the enquiry to Ian Standing (the local expert - not on arch-metals so far as I know).  If you don't get all the info you need from them or other replies here, email me direct in a cfew days and I can probably dig out dimensions and maybe better photos.

all the best,

David

--- On Wed, 15/6/11, Lyle E. Browning <[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">[log in to unmask]> wrote:

From: Lyle E. Browning <[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">[log in to unmask]>
Subject: 1621 Blast Furnace Height
To: [log in to unmask]" target="_blank">[log in to unmask]
Date: Wednesday, 15 June, 2011, 20:57

I'm attempting to do a 3D CAD version of the Falling Creek Ironworks blast furnace. It was the first in the new world, constructed possibly starting in 1619, but probably 1621 and was attacked with all there killed on March 22, 1622. Nothing survives above ground, and it is currently unknown whether it got into blast. It's my understanding that the furnaces ranged from about 16 feet high with a corresponding width to a max height of 25 feet, above which the load weight would collapse, crushing the charcoal resulting in nothing.

Is there documentary evidence for heights at different times? The ironmaster was John Berkeley of Gloucestershire, if there are know regional height differences or somesuch.

Thanks in advance,

Lyle Browning