Lab Group Data, Group F; Week 3, Spring 2024: Pottery

Introduction

Each group consisted of three members. Our group – Group F – consisted of the same members as last week: Jack Rizzo, Hope Yu, and me, Ashton Macklin. While each team was given different ratios of components to incorporate into their clays, each individual had to make a clay pot using the given clay compositions as instructed to their relevant group. Noting this, for much of the lab, I became occupied with the pottery process itself, and therefore was unable to write. I also started somewhat later, as I had assisted in measuring and acquiring all of the materials for a teammate – Hope – before I realized that it was intended that each person make their own individual pot.

Lab conditions and precedents

The referenced materials provided for mixing into a desired clay were referenced as the following:

• Clay: commercially homogenized pottery clay provided from the Ceramics Department
  • Group E would instead utilize clay harvested from the Cowling Arboretum, referenced as “Arb Clay”. It is darker in consistency, grittier, higher in organic material, denser, and thicker than commercial clay.
• Sand: gray, semi-find sand of what appeared to not be of beachy orig
• Gravel: small, consistently sized pebbles of varying slightly gray, blue, green, and pink color
• Chaff: given an option of either long-grain chaff of around 2-3 inches, or fluffy, somewhat aerated sawdust, which was not ground fine, and comparatively seemed like a shorter grain version of the long-grain chaff

The lab was conducted in Carleton College’s art yard, near the entrance to the Cowling Arboretum, across from its contemporary office. There were a couple of loud auditory interruptions, such as construction and construction vehicles moving back and forth, and a severe weather warning drill, whose siren was located right next door to us. These auditory developments were variables that mainly affected the initial few hours of the lab and subsided towards the end. Being outdoors, the weather was another variable that can impact the ceramics process. It was on the cooler side, and very windy, which, combined with the water used in wetting the clay throughout the process, made the clay prone to drying out, which could be harnessed as a positive.

Potmaking

Of these, our group’s target composition was as follows:

• Clay: 500g
• Sand: 80g
• Gravel: 14g, the lowest amount for any group
• Chaff: 6g, the highest amount for any group

In the context of the chaff, the mixtures used generally was around 1/3 long-grain (long chaff) and 2/3 short-grain (sawdust) across each Group F member. We originally were going to approach a procedural mixing method for the clay, but upon observing how different methods worked for different groups, we three generally employed a stage-by-stage incorporation. It was in essence where to the clay, we would first add sand, then mix, then add gravel, then mix, then add chaff, then mix, then continue kneading the mixture with water, slapping or hitting the clay against a flat surface such as the table to force air out of the clay, and to promote what a tutoring professor, Kelly Connole, described as “plastic”, a bendability factor in the clay affected by moisture and composition. Compared to every other group, we (Group F) were given the highest proportion of chaff and lowest proportion of sand as a component to mix into our clay as a temper, a chemical which treats the clay in pursuit of achieving a particular texture or conductivity for firing.

Naturally, the ratio of various tempers to one another affected not only consistency, the absorption of water in the clay, and the clay’s proneness to drying, but also, as we will find out in the firing stage, the resilience of the clay to exploding, splitting or cracking, noting that it will be fired at a comparatively much lower heat than most ceramics. These effects in particular are to be followed up on.

The pot-making process itself generally went fastest for Hope, who amongst our group, started her pot first (pictured in the thumbnail image preparing clay to be mixed) followed by Jack, then me.

Potmaking approach and manifest

Each member of our group encountered different variables that result out of our lab environment, and as a simple consequence of the pottery-making process in and of itself. Therefore, each member made a different type of pot, and sometimes, a different type of ceramic good entirely.

Material	Amount (g.)	Compositional proportion (est./1.0)
Total	596 g	1.0
Clay	500 g	0.83
Sand	80 g	0.13
Gravel	14 g	0.03
Chaff	6 g	0.01

Jack Rizzo:

Visual description: Jack made a small, sturdy bowl, which manifested after a few pinch-pot approaches. Much of the material was set aside, with some notable loss in weight alongside a smaller product. It is important to note, however, the 596 g. initial total is simply the intended result to ensure the constituent parts are combined in a way with a consistent comparative ratio. The actual resulting material used for a particular referenced piece can and will vary, as the reader will see in the following tables

Category	Initial	Before firing, 3 wks. after initial	After firing
Weight (g.)	342 g		263 g
Height (cm.)	450 mm		450 mm
Diameter (rim, cm.)	1200 mm		1150 mm
Diameter (widest point, cm.)	1200 mm		1150 mm
Wall section / thickness at rim (mm)	10 mm		6 mm

Hope Yu:

Visual description: Hope produced a very large, tall pot. Slightly ovaloid, yet straight in form. The walls were comparatively thin, well smoothed and coiled. Slip was applied to where constituent elements of the clay were not visible from the surface. The pot was produced very efficiently, and was finished earliest of our three constituent members.

Category	Initial	Before firing, 3 wks. after initial	After firing
Weight (g.)	872 g	739 g	688 g
Height (cm.)	150 mm	146 mm	145 mm
Diameter (rim, cm.)	105 mm	100 mm	100 mm
Diameter (widest point, cm.)	110 mm	105 mm	105
Wall section / thickness at rim (mm)	7.62 mm	7.62 mm	7.62 mm

Ashton Macklin:

Visual description: I took the longest time of any one person out of any group to finish my pot, having started slightly late as I was providing measurements and constituent clay additives for Hope before starting my pot, and readdressing my mixture’s water content, folding, and rekneading, in order to mimize the chance of air or weak points remaining in the clay when we go to fire it. I am expectant that my pot will be harmed in some way by the firing, but I am hoping otherwise, as much effort was put in to avoiding it. I made it to mirror the Sub-Roman Anglo-Saxon pot shapes we were introduced, with a rising bottom and flattening top, with a tall curved rim. It also has a flat, slighting lifting foot.

Category	Initial	Before firing, 3 wks. after initial	After firing
Weight (g.)	583 g	487 g	467 g
Height (cm.)	72.5 mm	65.91 mm	70.33 mm
Diameter (rim, cm.)	65.96 mm	59.66 mm	63.33 mm
Diameter (widest point, cm.)	104.57 mm	95.18 mm	100.64 mm
Wall section / thickness at rim (mm)	12.48 mm	9.39 mm	18.48 mm