I had prepared the following as an answer to someone who previously
asked:
We use both the SMAP-type flotation barrel and the Flote-Tech machine,
so I will try to make some comparisons for you, based on our
experiences.
First, I should point out our recovery rates. The biggest factor, no
matter what machine you are using, is the person operating it. You need
someone who is detail-oriented and can balance efficiency and quality
well. With the barrel-type system, we have 80-100% recovery, mostly in
the 85-90% range. We've been told that this is very good. With the
Flote-Tech machine, we get about 85-100%, mostly in the 85-95% range (we
have used this less, so those numbers are not quite as reliable).
The Flote-Tech takes a little more time to set up/break down, so if we
have less than a full day's worth of flotation to complete, we'll use
the barrel. If you will have day-after-day of flotation, go for the
Flote-Tech machine. You can process samples slightly faster in the
Flote-Tech, but the difference is really only noticeable after a full
day to several days of floating.
The Flote-Tech is the only of the two that you can really do inside, but
your building will need to be properly equipped for this (drains, sinks,
etc.). One of the limiting factors for us is the size of our doorways.
We can bring the system in and out through the exterior doorways, but
the interior doorways are too narrow - unless we take off the wheels, go
through the doors, and then replace the wheels (not something you would
really want to do unless the machine is staying in the room for a long
time).
For cleaning purposes, the barrel system is easier. Once the "sludge"
is removed, you can tip the barrel and spray out the remainder. The
Flote-Tech machine cleans easily until you get to the part below the
pump. I can't exactly recall what we have to do to get that out (the
tech that I trust to do our flotation is out sick today), but I know it
is an issue.
The barrel type is easy to transport and use on-site. I have had
extensive experience with this. I have not, however, used a Flote-Tech
on-site, so I can't give you an experienced opinion on that.
A few minor notes: The Flote-Tech machine is all metal and can get very
hot out in the sun. We also find we have a lot more issues with fingers
getting pinched, etc. in the parts of the Flote-Tech. The Flote-Tech
would seem to keep you cleaner while you are working, but you get
equally filthy with either machine.
My recommendation would be that you have one of each type of machine.
_________________________________
Susan E. Butler
Laboratory Director, Cultural Resources
THE LOUIS BERGER GROUP, INC.
900 50th Street
Marion, IA 52302
(319) 373-3043
(319) 377-5394 - fax
[log in to unmask] <blocked::mailto:[log in to unmask]>
www.culturalresourcegroup.com <http://www.culturalresourcegroup.com/>
________________________________
This message, including any attachments hereto, may contain privileged
and/or confidential information and is intended solely for the attention
and use of the intended addressee(s). If you are not the intended
addressee, you may neither use, copy, nor deliver to anyone this message
or any of its attachments. In such case, you should immediately destroy
this message and its attachments and kindly notify the sender by reply
mail. Unless made by a person with actual authority conferred by The
Louis Berger Group, Inc., (LBG) the information and statements herein do
not constitute a binding commitment or warranty by LBG. LBG assumes no
responsibility for any misperceptions, errors or misunderstandings. You
are urged to verify any information that is confusing and report any
errors/concerns to us in writing.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jennifer M. Faberson [mailto:[log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> ]
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 7:06 AM
> Subject: Re: Flotation
>
> Just as everyone involved in flotation and
> paleoethnobotanical study, we too are concerned about cross
> contamination of samples. That said, the original post was
> intended to gain a better understanding of what others are
> using for flotation and why. I should have made it clear that
> we were looking for general information and opinions on
> different flotation techniques.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> ] On
> Behalf Of Davis, Daniel (KYTC)
> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 4:21 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Flotation
>
> You can test either for accuracy - and I prefer avoiding
> contamination.
>
> Daniel B. Davis
> Archaeologist Coordinator
> Kentucky Transportation Cabinet
> Division of Environmental Analysis
> 200 Mero Street
> Frankfort, KY 40622
> (502) 564-7250
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> ] On
> Behalf Of Jennifer M. Faberson
> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 4:03 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Flotation
>
> The flotation department at our company is considering
> developing an indoor home made flotation tank. In your
> professional opinion which is more accurate a flot-tech
> machine (which we are currently using) or a homemade machine?
>
>
>
> Jennifer M. Faberson
>
> Historic Materials Specialist
>
> Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc.
>
> 151 Walton Ave.
>
> Lexington, KY 40508
>
> (859) 252-4737
>
> <mailto:[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> >
[log in to unmask]
>
>
>
|
