Oxides | Minerals | Materials | Recipes | Articles | Glossary | Hazards | Videos | Properties | Schedules | Temperatures | Tests | Troubles
•The secret to cool bodies and glazes is a lot of testing.
•The secret to know what to test is material and chemistry knowledge.
•The secret to learning from testing is documentation.
•The place to test, do the chemistry and document is an account at https://insight-live.com
•The place to get the knowledge is https://digitalfire.com
Alternate Names: Custer Spar
| If this formula is not unified correctly please contact us. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Sp | VAL |
| 1 | 2.6 |
| Sp | TOT | 35M | 48M | 65M | 100M | 150M | 200M | 325M | NOTE |
| 1 | 100 | 0.3% (0.5% max) | 4% (5% max) |
| Sp | Valu |
| 1 | 8.0 |
This is one of the main feldspars used in the ceramic industry in North America. It is used in industries such as abrasives, sanitary ware, floor and wall tile, dinnerware, pottery, and electrical porcelain. It is a ceramic grade, high potash feldspar and is available in crude, 200, 325 mesh and chip form.
Since 2012 we have been getting independent reports of a reduction in the potash content (below that stated on the data sheet). Traditionally Pacer, the manufacturer, has reported it as around 10% (as is shown in the chemistry given here, and from their online data sheet). However Ron Roy claims that, from his independent analysis of specimens over time, around the year 2000 the K2O content dropped to about 7.5 (with no accompanying change in the Na2O). Pacer disputes this. The chemical analyses they provide with individual shipments of material continued to report K2O, Na2O and Fe2O3 levels at quite similar to those stated on their data sheet. Additionally, they have a page on their website named "Clarification of Custer Feldspar Chemical Composition Data" in which they claim their analysis is, and has been, accurate. Whether justified or not, Custer Feldspar has become somewhat of a scapegoat, people actually blaming it when online recipes they try do not work!
As with any feldspar, production users should be vigilant to do sieve analysis testing to spot any iron bearing particles in the plus 100 mesh range.
A cone 8 comparative flow tests of Custer, G-200 and i-minerals high soda and high potassium feldspars. Notice how little the pure materials are moving (bottom), even though they are fired to cone 11. In addition, the sodium feldspars move better than the potassium ones. But feldspars do their real fluxing work when they can interact with other materials. Notice how well they flow with only 10% frit added (top), even though they are being fired three cones lower.
A GLFL test for melt-flow to compare Custer Feldspar from Feb/2012 (right) with Mar/2011 (fired at cone 6). Custer Feldspar does not melt like this by itself at cone 10. It was mixed 80:20 Feldspar:Ferro Frit 3134. This test demonstrates that the material has been very consistent between these two shipments.
Out Bound Links
http://www.pacerminerals.com/msds1.html
http://www.pacerminerals.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/FELDSPAR-200-325-Tech-Data.pdf
http://www.pacerminerals.com/prodcomp.html
K-Feldspar, Orthoclase, K Feldspar, Potassium Feldspar
http://www.pacerminerals.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Feldspar_Tech_Data_Clarification.pdf
https://digitalfire.com/4sight/datasheets/SDSCusterFeldspar.pdf
In Bound Links
G200 Feldspar, G200 Spar, G 200 Spar, G 200, G 200 Feldspar
MC 200-K Feldspar
PF-01 Potassium Feldspar, PF-01 Potash Feldspar, Mahavir Feldspar
By Tony Hansen
