Bladite, Mete, Chenko,
First of all: A great discussion. I (Ethan too) appreciate the marketplace of ideas where we can have different opinions and experiences expressed without the contention found on other forums and the internet. We can all ”agree to disagree without being disagreeable”. I also think this is what separates Ethan from a lot of others in the knife business.
I have been in the knife industry for over 23 years with four different companies. It has been my willing task to examine thousands of broken blades from customer returns. (For me, the most important reason for getting the returned blade from the customer is not to verify a return claim but to examine the blade.) I make the above statement, not to brag but to verify a lot of blades have been eyeballed. Ethan and I have worn out a lot of bodies in our knifetime.
I have also examined hundreds of blades in controlled lab and real world testing in order to understand blade fractures. My lab setup was this: I fixed the blade (edge up) by the tang in a fixture. This fixture was able to be rotated so that the edge could be tilted either side to any angle.
The force was supplied by a swinging moment arm that would drop accurately onto the edge of the blade. The impact head could be adjusted for weight and shape. It was fixed at the tail end of the knife and duplicated a swinging motion of the knife (in reverse) The blades were situated either completely vertical or angled and the impactor head was varied to supply a different weight (force) or impact shape on the edge.
In a nutshell, if the blade was held vertical, weight was added until a half moon chip broke out. The center of the impact was the center of the semi circular chip. It had mostly squared, perpendicular edges. If we put too much force the blade would chip and almost instantaneously shear completely in half. The impactor shape also had a bearing on the break. Smaller, sharper edges would chip out or break the edge quickly while larger rounder impacts didn’t. I think the force was spread over a wider area. Mete, this validates your thinking on the difficulty chopping small Hemlock knots as opposed to larger knots.
When we angled the blade by varying degrees, we could also get the edge to chip out. The chip shape would not always be a half round chip but had different shapes. The edges were not square but had a tapered, flaked edge like a knapped piece of flint. Just for all to know, the testing was all over the map but some trends did start to emerge. I also wish I had a high speed slo-mo camera to see what was going on.
Bladite: your link was spot on. While I originally thought about the differences between the glass and steel micro structures, the more I reread your link, the more the saw the similarities between that article and what I observed. When I observe Flint Knappers flaking off chips, their chip edges mirror the edges that I was able to produce on angled strikes. I also note that it doesn’t take a lot of force to chip off a flake nor does the graver have to be harder than the flint. Just enough force to start a fracture. (The fine point of the graver certainly will magnify the PSI force so that it exceeds the strength of the flint) I think the same applies to the steel edge. So Chenko and Mete, I agree with you on this lateral/torsional impact aspect. But I still stand firm on my belief that a square straight on hit can propagate a fracture if the strength of the steel is exceeded or the steel structure has inclusions or Retained Austenite. I also agree with Bladite that the vibrational shock is responsible for the chips. The notion that the grabbing of the blade creates fractures does not ring true with my testing. The crack or complete fracture happens with a high degree of impact and suddenness. The torsional grab in tenacious material would enable the tempered steel to: withstand the force, flex and return, not suddenly fracture. I use the example of martial artists breaking bricks. The impact is forceful and extremely fast not a slow grab and twist. That is, unless I am not understanding you, Chenko. If I am misrepresenting your thoughts, I apologize.
The obvious solution would to thicken the blade and edge. However, I want all to look at the reverse side of thicker. A thinner blade /edge requires a lot less force to penetrate any material. Less force to apply to the edge, less force to chip out the edge. Edge quality gives Ethan’s blades superb cutting and slicing ability. Thicker means more weight, more difficulty in balancing of the knife. A knife that is more bludgeon than cutter.
Much of the lab testing was to optimize grinding and heat treat processes. Improper heat treat leaves Retained Austenite which causes hardness/strength differentials in the Martensite structure. This causes stress risers and cracks. This Retained Austenite will eventually turn into Martensite….Untempered Martensite. Again this causes the same but opposite stress risers resulting in cracks. When I started in the knife industry, the old timers were adamant about reducing/eliminating Retained Austenite and the longer I am in the business, the more I concur. Grinding burns and heat stresses the steel in a very similar fashion.
Okay, I’ve had my say. Whichever way you believe, I thank you for patience and interaction. As Bruce Lee (a Good Daoist) used to say: Absorb what is useful, discard what is not”. You may do the same with this.
In the end we are all here because we like Becker Knives, Ethan and each other’s company.