cardboard cutting w/ some edge photos

Joined
Sep 19, 2001
Messages
8,968
a few different threads from this board and the Toolshed got me to try this out. Using a $9.99 60-100X magnifier bought from Radio Shack, and my 4MP Kodak digital camera, I took photos (bad ones) of the edges of some knives after making 100 cuts in cardboard. The cardboard comes from the trays that six-packs of sodas are shipped in 4 at a time. Here's a pic of some of the cuts.


So far, I've used a Spyderco Paramilitary (S30V), Benchmade model 46 (D2), custom neck knife (CPM154), Byrd Cara Cara (8Cr13MoV), Sorsakoski balisong style folder (12C27???), BM 42S(yet unknown, possibly 440C), CRKT S2 (ATS34), and BM Ritter Griptilian (M2) All were sharpened with Spyderco fine ceramic (white rods on the Sharpmaker) and then stropped with chromium oxide loaded leather. All but the Cara Cara and Rittergrip were given a 20 degree per side microbevel. The Ritter wa set at 15, and the Cara Cara has a chisel edge, which was honed with the Sharpmaker rod held in hand. All could clean shave before cutting the cardboard. Here's the photos of the edges, knives in the same order as listed above.

http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/hardheart_7/album?.dir=/ffd0re2&.src=ph

The first 5 photos are of the Paramilitary, but only the fifth is at all clear. I added some red dots in the first 4 to try and help show the chips the S30V had suffered from the cutting. so, the only decent photos are in the second and third rows. The para, along with all others, could still shave after the 100 cardboard slices, despite having 6 chips of roughly the same size and shape as the photo. It cut through the cardboard well, it just came out with some scars.

The 46 did not chip, but as can be seen, the edge was uneven, somewhat 'wavy' after the fresh sharpening and before the cutting. I do not cut much with either balisong, I just enjoy flipping them from time to time. You can see in the pic the rough factory edge finish just above the narrow area of the micro I applied. This knife was very hard to use in this test, requiring what I considered an unsafe level of force for simple slices through cardboard. The recurve helped in starting the cuts, but the saber grind in general made this difficult in comparison to most of the other knives.

Next is the CPM154, made by BF member butcher_block. There is unfortunately some debris on the edge, but there was no chipping beyond one I was unable to focus on with my crude setup. It was just that small (or I'm just that bad at this :p) Slices were fairly easy, although my funky technique coupled with the healthy curve of the blade had the tip slipping through without much cutting. Just an issue with technique.

Next was the Cara Cara. This was just as difficult to slice with as the 46. This is a combo edge model, and the edge bevel is ground on only one side, while the blade is double hollow ground. This knife was very sharp oob, and the stropping sure didn't hurt it at all, I am not entirely sure why this one required so much force from the very first cut. No chipping at all, but it was slightly more abrasive than some of the others when shaving arm hair after the 100 cuts. Probably blunted more than the others.

The Sorsakoski came next, and it was one of the easier slicers, by a good margin. The blade passed through the cardboard with much ease. Also, when I began looking at the edge through the magnifier, I was not surprised to see that the edge was still essentially pristine at this magnification. That is, until I got to the belly and found what you see in the photo. A jagged break in the edge, which I couldn't hope to explain.

Next up is the 42S (combo edge) The edge is double ground, unlike the Cara, but this was very nearly as hard to use as it and the other bali. you can see the edge of this knife is also wavy and uneven (something about BM's balis?) What I couldn't get good shots of was the chipping. It chipped in 9 places, they were just smaller than the Para chips. There is one in the photo, just a little to the right. If no one can see it, I'll add a circle around it in MS paint. This was probably the worst performance of this group, as it was difficult to use, and showed some of the greatest damage after.

Next photo is the S2. It sliced well, and came out with no chips. Very good performance for this particular test from a discontinued knife made by a lower-budget company (in knife knut terms). I really can't say much more about it, there were no problems.

Last pic is the M2 of my Ritter Griptilian. This, like the CPM154, had one spot of edge damage that I just couldn't photograph. This was due to placement this time. It was very close to the edge, and I couldn't position it behind the magnifier the way I have things attached. Sorry I couldn't get a photo, and the best description I can offer is to just look at the uneven edge of the 46. Now just imagine a portion of the M2 looking like that, about 1/5th the length in the photo. Not bad, considering it was about the thinnest behind the edge (~0.018") and the micro was 5 degrees narrower. It was also one of the smoothest slicers.




I have a few more to do yet, but I need more trays.
 
Nice work.

The para, along with all others, could still shave after the 100 cardboard slices, despite having 6 chips of roughly the same size and shape as the photo. It cut through the cardboard well, it just came out with some scars.

This poses the question as to how due you guage edge retention. Which is of more importance, the greatest amount of damage or the average amount of damage. In general how does the localized damage correlate to gross cutting ability (this depends no how you are cutting as chips enhance slices but degrade push cuts). Comments on sharpening would also be useful. How are you cutting the cardboard?

This looks like a fracture chip :

231fre2.jpg


as does this, note how sharp the failure point runs to the edge :

e1e6re2.jpg


I would really like to know the localized carbide distribution at those locations. As a note, if you repeat the cardboard cutting a few times to smooth out the average variations in the stock media, the initial sharpness, condition of the steel in the edge, cutting dynamics, etc., this allows you to say if a difference is systematic between knives/steel. However multiple runs on groups of steel (high / low carbide) allow such groups to be characterized directly.

-Cliff
 
Sharpening was 10 passes per side on the ceramic and the strop. Angle on the strop was determined by pushing edge-in very lightly and raising the spine until the edge bit into the leather. I examined all the blades under magnification before cutting to make sure they were free of chips. All were except for the Para, which I had already noted in other threads was chipping during sharpening. It had a couple chips before the cutting, and came out with 8. I cut on a draw, moving fairly slowly for most of the knives. Went just a bit quicker with the Ritter and S2, since they cut so much more easily.

Priority mail shipping boxes are free at the post office, so I may switch to those so I can get a pile of them quickly. I keep a few around for trading/selling anyway.
 
I cut on a draw, moving fairly slowly for most of the knives.

You might want to consider push cuts because they will dull a blade much more faster. So fast that you will quickly actually get to the point where you can stop because the blades won't cut the cardboard (perpendicular) without bending it initially. Of course this is a test well suited to high polishes, it isn't suitable to checking coarse edges.

-Cliff
 
Some interesting work, hardheart - thanks for posting.

Curious about a couple things .... can you post edge thickness and bevel width, especially for the BM 46 and Cara Cara? I'm interested in why these two took so much force.

Also how did you couple your camera to the microscope? Assuming that's the RS 'scope I've seen with a rubber cup over the ocular, I'm amazed you were able to take those shots.
 
I thought about puch cutting, but since I started by slicing with the para to see how much of the edge was chipping, I just stuck with it. Also, I'd like to set up a scale first for push cuts.

Some interesting work, hardheart - thanks for posting.

Curious about a couple things .... can you post edge thickness and bevel width, especially for the BM 46 and Cara Cara? I'm interested in why these two took so much force.

Also how did you couple your camera to the microscope? Assuming that's the RS 'scope I've seen with a rubber cup over the ocular, I'm amazed you were able to take those shots.

Paramilitary
.048-.059 wide edge bevel, .025-.027 thick behind the edge bevel, .044 5mm up from edge
46
.028 wide, .018-.020 thick, .065 5mm up
Cara
.090 wide, .033-.034 thick, .047 5mm up
Sorsakoski
.026 wide, .011-.018 thick, .069 5mm up
42
.041-.054 wide, .031-.034 thick, .069 5mm up
S2
.033-.038 wide, .022-.027 thick, .037 5mm up
Ritter
.038-.040 wide, .017-.019 thick. .041 5mm up

don't have the necker right now to measure

The bevels tended to get wider and thicker near the tip.


I've got the scope rubber banded down and I just put the camera lens right on the cup and zoom in. It is frustrating trying to get the blade, magnifier, and camera all lined up without something shifting and causing me to lose focus or the entire shot.
 
Very nice work, in depth and informative. It's nice to see such a cross section of knives tested together like this. I have the same microscope and would love to figure out how to get good pictures through it. Good luck with that and share your technique when you get it perfected.
 
Thanks again, hardheart. Using your numbers here are approximate (included) edge angles I get:

Paramilitary - 27-31 degrees

BM46 - 40-45 degrees

Cara Cara - 22 degrees

Sorsakoski - 25-44 degrees

BM42 - 39-49 degrees

CRKT S2 - 41-45 degrees

Ritter - 26-28 degrees

Performance of the two Benchmade balisongs seems to make sense, looking at the edge angles and thickness 5mm up. I'm not sure what would explain the Cara Cara's performance, perhaps the edge didn't get optimal sharpening (I usually cheat with chisel grinds and microbevel the flat side for this very reason.)

I've got the scope rubber banded down and I just put the camera lens right on the cup and zoom in. It is frustrating trying to get the blade, magnifier, and camera all lined up without something shifting and causing me to lose focus or the entire shot.
That's kind of what I envisioned .... you're obviously a lot more coordinated and patient than I am!
 
Performance of the two Benchmade balisongs seems to make sense, looking at the edge angles and thickness 5mm up. I'm not sure what would explain the Cara Cara's performance, perhaps the edge didn't get optimal sharpening (I usually cheat with chisel grinds and microbevel the flat side for this very reason.)
I did make a couple passes on the backside with the ceramic, and a cleaning pass with the leather. I also gave a quick swipe on arm hair to make sure it was still clean shaving without resistance. I really can't envision why I was having to push so hard with this knife, as hard as i did with the BM balis.
OTOH, the Sorsakoski was really easy to slice with. The thickness 5mm up would have it wedging very similarly to the BMs, yet it was in my top three for ease fo slice (with the S2 and Ritter). That very thin edge makes a large difference. The knife is like a scandi grind with an extra bevel, but from the factory that way.
 
I've also been surprised by the force needed to push cut or slice cardboard with certain knives. I suspect wedging could be a factor, usually I don't pay a lot of attention to how the cardboard on each side of the blade splays but probably should. It might be interesting to try cutting with the knives at a 45 degree angle to the plane of the cardboard which would let the material move out of the way more easily. Also when I've had fine edges that were too thin to hold up to the abrasion, you really notice the amount of force go up with just a small amount of cutting.

Interesting when you think about it that ordinary cardboard may be one of the more complex cutting tasks for a general utility blade. Meanwhile the lowly boxcutter continues to work pretty well even when its edge is so far gone it wouldn't be much good for anything else.
 
Excellent work, Hardheart. :thumbup: Thanks for the time and effort involved. Info was clear and concise.

Now I've got to go buy a magnifier like that.

Jimmy
 
I've also been surprised by the force needed to push cut or slice cardboard with certain knives. I suspect wedging could be a factor, usually

Wedging is the main force on cutting cardboard, you can see this by feeling how much force it takes to just push the blade into the cut on the start and then how much it increases as the blade moves into the cardboard. All the increase is due to wedging, that initial force is just the actually cutting opposition against the edge which is usually not overly significant if the knife is sharp.

Also, I'd like to set up a scale first for push cuts.

The easiest way to do this is to just cut slots in a couple of pieces of wood which you can drop the stock in and then lay the whole thing on a scale.

-Cliff
 
Wedging is the main force on cutting cardboard, you can see this by feeling how much force it takes to just push the blade into the cut on the start and then how much it increases as the blade moves into the cardboard. All the increase is due to wedging, that initial force is just the actually cutting opposition against the edge which is usually not overly significant if the knife is sharp.

-Cliff

The wedging force difference from push cutting through cardboard with my Jess Horn from the very thin tip area (spine wise) vs. the thick area (in the spine over the Spyderhole) near the choil is pretty amazing. My R2 sails through cardboard great with it's full flat grind, but my sabre grinds like the Byrd and Enduras have a lot more drag because of the thicker grinds. The Manix and Rukus I used in the passarounds, even with their thicker stock, seemed to have much less wedging than my Endura's and Byrd, which makes sense because they have high, thin, flat grinds.
 
Back
Top