Can damascus blades cut?

Re: Can damascus blades cut?

quote:

Originally posted by kamkazmoto
"About 25-30 years when the modern knife community was
rediscovering damascus, the normal damascus blade was
500-2000 layers thick with a packed edge(a blade where where
the layers of the damascus are forged thinner toward the edge).
A damascus blade from a smith like Moran would cut all day long
and still shave. Modern damascus blades seem to be 100-200
layers thick and a lot of makers are using very high quality
damascus blanks for stock removal thereby negating the
advantages of a packed edge."


I know very little about the current state of damascus, I do know that in the years that Kam' is speaking of Bill Moran, if asked to make a using knife, would sandwich a solid piece of steel between two pices of damascus. I never knew Bill to talk about "packing and edge" Bill and I have fallen out of touch through the years, so I can only speak of those early years.

A. G.
 
To be honest a lot of my information comes from half remembered bits of information and what was probably then half truths. I am very glad that I opened this thread if because I have gotten a lot of information from very knowledgable people.

I have been collecting knives for a long time, my parents bought me my first "switchblade" almost 50 years ago. I have always been around the fringes lurking, reading books and magazines on knives and knifemaking but have never had the opportunity to participate in ongoing discussions like these. Keep it coming people, I am no longer young but I can still appreciate the opportunity to learn.


Thanks again
Gary
 
Wow! Kevin, that was a mouthful. You know, the original posted thread had so many controversial points, that I hoped only to adress a few in a reasonable amount of time. However, it looks as though the forum has fulfilled its function and has brought forth much pedantic ranting( I mean that in a good way Kev)Yes, and yes again, its just steel. I wouldn't put anything into pattern welded material that I wouldn't make a straight carbon blade from. It IS indeed time to lose the notion that pattern welded blades are potentialy or inherently superior to straight carbon blades, it IS in fact a straight carbon blade with fancy alloy distributions designed and controlled by the smith. Chemical analysis, however confirms that after folding operations that result in higher layer counts, the carbon has in fact migrated to a more or less even level. I have seen Bud Hubbard PED formed from thin shim stock, result in a less migrated material that when bent repeatedly after heat treating, broke like a green twig. Was this the "damascus effect" we have heard in legend? Probably. Is it ultimately desirable? I don't know.IMHO, the strongest, toughest material is made from fully hardened tempered martensite. We will probably argue this till doomsday, but tests that I myself have done and others as well confirm this. I do not subsribe to the edge quench as being the ultimate in heat treating procedures. I have seen blades done in tis manner bend at the smallest exertion, in spite of having a hard sharp edge. This in my opinion is a patently DEFFECTIVE blade. One blade flexes and and fails after being subjected to tens of thousands of lbs. preasure, another bends to 90 degees after only a couple of hundred or so. Which one would you rather have in high a stress situation? Oh well it seems that I've opened a new thread hear myself.












i
 
And oh yes, by the way as a post script;
kamkazmoto, how do you know that damascus blade you paid that $150. premium for, does not cut as well as some other blade? Was it tested competitvely against another of known performance norms, or do you just maybe "feel" it doesn't? Until you've done the former, the latter is unreliable speculation and as such, inadmissable in the arena of factual knowledge.
 
Wow, Have I opened a can of worms.

I have only owned three damascus blades; The first I never intended to use, the second an old Boker limited edition didn't cut very well but was probably never intended to be used. The third a Microtech cut well but didn't seem to hold an edge as well as my regular Microtech. Unfortunately I no longer have have the last two knives. Maybe it is time for me to get another and try again.

Once again I want to thank everyone for the input. To say I learned a lot would be a vast understatment

Gary
 
Here comes my two cents on parts of this subject. Some of you know me; some may not be familiar with me. I apprenticed under Devin Thomas and was production manager of his operation for several years. I learned a few things from him. So here goes. There are several "Different" types of materials commonly refereed to as damascus.

Wootz Damascus is considered the "True" damascus. Al Pendray has done extensive research on this material and I believe holds a patent on what is considered modern "Wootz Damascus". This material was not layered up like the modern damascus and derived its pattern from repeated heats and forging which resulted in the formation of carbides. These carbides created the patterns in this material.

The Japanese made their blades by the forging and folding method. These blades are sometimes refered to as damascus but their forging and folding was more of a purification process than a pattern forming process. The material was worked over and over to remove impurities, increase the carbon content and produce a homogeneous mixture of steel. The pattern was derived from this process and could have upwards of 20,000 layers. It could also incorporate a soft center core to increase the durability of the blade.

The material that most people are referring to as "Damascus" is actually a "Pattern Welded Steel". It uses the same basic process as the Japanese method but normally the steel is already in a refined state. The pattern is created by upsetting the parallel layers created in the forging process. Choice of material will determine the edge holding and durability of material. Heat treat and forging will also determine the edge holding ability of the material. Some damascus is for pure aesthetic visuals, some for pure edge holding properties and some do both very well. This is all dependant on the choice of materials, heat treat and ability of the forger to produce a material free of bad welds.

This brings me to my real point of contention in this whole thread."THE MYTH OF THE 500 LAYER BLADE" The layer content of a particular piece of steel will not have any real affect on a steels cutting ability. Layer count really only affects the appearance of the blade pattern. The fewer the layers the coarser the pattern the more layers the finer the pattern. The 500 layer myth falls apart quite easily when you examine say one of Howard Clarks "San Mai" blades which are composed of three layers of pattern welded steel. A hard inner core sandwiched between two layers of a softer material. San Mai blades are designed to cut well. It is fairly easy to count the layers of steel in a piece of damascus and much of the stuff touted as 312, 500 or even more layers are outright untruths. Just count the lines and you can figure this out for yourself. The 500 layer myth was created to sell knives pure and simple, just as the packing myth is still being perpetuated as a way to increase a knives edge holding ability and therefore sell more knives. Wayne Goddard and many others have done extensive research on packing and have found it to be untrue. The reason most pattern-welded blades are 150-200 layers are so the pattern may be easily seen. Start approaching 500 or more layers and the pattern becomes very fine and therefore harder to discern. From my time with Devin I found that age actually had a large bearing on what type of pattern people wanted to use in their blades. Makers that were older or that had poor eyesight wanted coarser patterns. Younger makers with better eyesight normally wanted finer patterns.

In closing I would advise you to stop and think about what you are being told. If it sounds too good to be true it probably is.
 
Mr. Washburn,

I have just visited your website and the only thing that I can say is "Mama Mia thatsa some knife".

For everyone - I have already admited my ignorance so it is hopefully not necessary to do so again. I have definately pushed the hot button of a number of very well known and outstanding bladesmiths whose qualifications cannot be questioned. It is necessary to say thank all of you for taking the time to reply, I mean that. I and several hundred forumites have learned a lot.

Gary

edited because I can't write a cohesive sentence.
 
Thank you Mr. Washburn for all that good dope on pattern welded definitions and such. However I would be remiss if I did not take one small point to task. The japanese smiths were not attempting to
carburize by folding repeatedly, it is my understanding that they in fact were attempting to bring carbon levels down to workable levels by burning it out. If you examine any photos or film footage of their steel making process, you will notice that they are working the material in the white range and is often emmiting sparks when it is introduced to the anvil. They do not lower their heats until they judge carbon content to be within workable levels. This hypersaturated carbon state results from the manner in which they begin their steel making process, by allowing iron sand to melt and drip down through a very hot charcoal fire, the resulting bloom, or "tamahagane" as they call it, is over 3% carbon, not workable until repeated folding at high heats results in carbon loss.
 
That is my understanding as well. The ancient Japanese steel folding process was developed as a way of reducing the carbon content and other impurities from a relatively poor quality iron ore.

The hammer was dipped into water frequently, causing a small explosion of steam with each strike blowing the scale off the surface off the iron billet. Over time, this process purified the crude ore extract and reduced the carbon content from the levels of unhardenable wrought iron down to less than 1%, which is in the right range for hardenable steel. Other unwanted impurities in the ore were also removed by this process.

It is worth pointing out that the ancients had no understanding of the critical nature of carbon concentration themselves. They would not have recognized any term for carbides. Their methods were developed by trial and error over time, and were closely held family secrets.

Modern smiths have the good fortune to be able to work with very precisely defined materials and temperature controls. And they enjoy a much better understanding ot the chemical nature of steel. The Japanese folded steel technique was originally a way of making very poor raw materials into something workable, not a way of making superior starting materials better.

Para
 
Wow.., great thread guys! Also.., thanks for taking the time J.D., good to have your input!


"Hunters seek what they [WANT].., Seekers hunt what they [NEED]"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top