Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 27th February 2005, 06:52 PM   #12
Ann Feuerbach
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 133
Default

Perhaps the ingot does not have a magnetic alignment. I do not know of any experiments done on the archaeomagnetism of iron objects because for archaeomagnetism to be studies, the object must be in situ since firing. Archaeomagnetism is based on the principle of Thermoremanent magnetism (TRM). When a material containing iron such as clay, is heated to above 700 C (1290 F) the iron particles in the clay align to face magnetic north. The direction and intensity of the magnetism of the kiln or hearth is measured to give the date. I assumed that the same principle would have applied to the crucible steel. All the literature I have read just refers to "iron particles". Perhaps I am wrong and the ingot would not have had a TRM. As I said, I must do some more research on this. I must point out that having TRM and being magnetic are different things. As a side not, I have noticed that many archaeological slags with high iron content and iron lumps, that one side is definitly attracted to a magnete while the other side definitly repels.
Ann
Ann Feuerbach is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.