It is a clay, a very non-plastic one. These are fired SHAB test bars of Barnard Slip going from cone 04 (bottom) to cone 6 (top, where it is melting). Porosity is under 3% and the fired shrinkage above 15% from cone 1 upward (second from bottom). Drying shrinkage is 4% at 25% water (it is very non-plastic). The darkness of the fired color suggests higher MnO than our published chemistry shows (and also higher iron). The white areas on the lower temperature bars are soluble salts.

Since this is a fine particled material, it could likely be made plastic with a bentonite addition, likely 5% or more would be needed. Solubles could be precipitated using barium carbonate.

Shown here are Creality Slicer, Prusa Slicer and Simplify 3D. Each of these can import STL, OBJ and 3MF files. Each permits resizing, rotating, reflecting and duplicating individual items and can efficiently place and space multiple items and groups. Each saves or exports as 3MF files. On the right is the Fusion 360 print dialog where I can choose which slicer and which format to send.

OBJ files were introduced in 1980 for visual rendering (e.g. animation, gaming, special effects). Files store surface geometry as interconnected triangles and define surface textures, materials and colors. These features were overkill for early 3D printers.

STL (Stereolithography) files were developed in 1987 by 3D Systems specifically for CAD and 3D printing, having a single focus on geometry. They were simple and computationally efficient (and also unitless like OBJ, assuming mm). STLs permitted only one object. They dominated early 3D printing processes (FDM, SLA, SLS), where color or texture was irrelevant and provided a simple standard for industry growth. However, modern printers can now do color, texture and multi-material, thus...

3MF (3D Manufacturing Format) files were introduced in 2015 specifically for more advanced 3D printing. To OBJ they add object orientation, units, printing instructions and meta information. Objects in 3MF files can be manipulated separately in the slicer.

All three formats are generated by modern CAD software (for handoff to a slicer app). 3MF is the preferred one.

G2931 Worthington Clear is a popular low to medium-fire transparent glaze recipe. It contains 55% Gerstley Borate (GB) plus 30% kaolin (GB melts at a very low temperature). GB is also very plastic, like a clay. I have thrown a pot from this glaze recipe! This explains why high Gerstley Borate glazes often dry so slowly and shrink and crack during drying. When recipes also contain a plastic clay like this one the shrinkage is even worse. GB is also slightly soluble, over time it gels glaze slurries even in smaller percentages. Countless potters struggle with Gerstley Borate recipes.

This is L4023F (a test body like our H440 cone 10R body). The polygons on this surface are produced when the 3D CAD software converts from its native format to an STL file that slicer software can use. These are the product of the default settings (which can be changed but increase file size). The precision of the 3D printer is evident in that it can reproduce these. Since the polygons are not visible in the final glazed piece, neither the PLA surface on the 3D printed block mold, or the surface of the plaster case mold made from it, were sanded.

Feldspars are employed in glaze recipes as melters. So comparing their melt fluidities should be helpful in deciding if one can substitute for another (of course, if possible a soda predominant feldspar should be substituted for another soda spar). Feldspars don't melt alone at cone 6 (2200F) so we mixed each with 15% Ferro Frit 3195. Nepheline Syenite is obviously the champion melter here. Other similar ones can be spotted easily. In the end, degree of melt is a valid consideration in determining if one feldspar is a viable substitute for another in a recipe. Even if the feldspar you want to substitute does not melt as much a little frit can be added to the recipe to make up for the difference (e.g. 3-5%).

Only three tile shapes were needed. The fish cutters were 3D printed to both cut and stamp at the same time. Multiple slightly different sizes of the triangle and trapezoid were made to accommodate irregularities and keep joints tighter. The clay is M340 and the glazes are Amaco Celadons and Potter's Choice (for brushing). These are small and we found that a good way to paint them was to glue them down to a plaster slab with a few drops of glaze (it was easy to scrape off when the three coats had dried).

This glaze is "stretched" on the clay so it cracks. When the lines are close together like this it is more serious. If the effect is intended, it is called "crackle" (but no one should intend this on functional ware). Potters, hobbyists and artists invariably bump into this issue whether using commercial glazes or making their own.

"Art language" solutions don't work, at least some technical words are needed to understand it. Crazing is a mismatch in the thermal expansions of glaze and body. Most ceramics expand slightly on heating and contract on cooling. The amount of change is very small, but ceramics are brittle and glazes are rigidly attached. If they are stretched on the ware cracks will occur to relieve the stress (usually during cooling in the firing but sometimes much later). All glaze manufacturers advise against crazing on functional ware.

In 2025 ChatGPT’s four glaze adjustment suggestions are either wrong or will accidentally fix crazing because they address other issues that just happen to also be present. Adding enough silica or alumina brings unacceptable side effects on multiple fronts. Alkali fluxes need to be substituted, not reduced. Simply substituting frits changes the overall chemistry making it a different glaze - why not just use a recommended recipe for the body as suggested by Gemini? Adding silica to a body increases, not decreases, the thermal expansion (and it reduces vitrification). Increased vitrification doesn’t make the body resist crazing (bodies don’t craze) - unless increased vitrification happens to also increase the thermal expansion (but not introduce warping). Slower cooling or a lower refire only delays crazing. Comparing COE’s of body and glaze is impossible for anyone not having a dilatometer to test both (you cannot compare measured and calculated COEs and calculation of COE for bodies is impossible). Embracing the crazing is a no-go for functional ware.

Gemini correctly explains why it happens. But, it suffers similar misconceptions about vitrification, cooling, silica additions to the body, vitrification and ignores the side effects of increasing silica or alumina in a glaze recipe. It is right that alkalis need reduction, but fails to note what to substitute. It recommends zinc as a stabilizer (whatever that means), but zinc is a strong flux that should be substituted for KNaO. Thinner glaze coating just delays crazing. Its suggestions about experimenting, keeping records, and researching to find recipes known to be compatible with the body are good. The only information available from glaze or body suppliers that might help is a chart that permits ordering products from lowest to highest COE (enabling you to at least transition in the right direction for better fit).

We wanted to compare the melt fluidity of G2934Y (left) to G2934 (right). To do that we prepared GBMF test balls (see below). The forming and drying process leave a flat spot so the gumball-sized balls are easy to place on a porcelain tile. During firing they flatten out. The degree to which they do acts as a measure of the flow (when compared with another). Many characteristics that one would not observe on glaze tiles reveal themselves in this test. In this case, we needed to know if the melt flow was at least as good (and this proves it is better). Reactive glaze tend to be the norm in recent years, their primary characteristic is being runny (having high melt fluidity). Their fired character...

Reactive glazes don't melt into a homogeneous melt and they don't freeze as a typical glass. The physical nature of the material powders (e.g. their particle size and the individual nature of how they respond to heat, soften, melt and interact with their own kind and others) create a melt that does not solidify into a homogeneous glass. These glazes are said to be dynamic. And unpredictable effects often occur during firing, like color variegation, speckles, streaks, mottled and flowing textures, crystallization, pooling, etc. The outcome is influenced by factors such as the materials chosen to source the needed oxides, firing schedule, kiln atmosphere, cooling or heating cycle, etc. These glazes are at their best when each piece has a unique, artistic character. But, this is also their worst feature, making them "tipping point glazes", ones whose visual character is a product of fragile and not well understood features of the materials and process. Small changes typically produce big changes in fired appearance (often to the chagrin of the potter).