Corrugated bevels - who actually likes them?

I like the CBT for what it is. The 'fuller' on a sword was not meant as a 'blood groove' you only find that on fancy cutting boards. The 'fuller was meant to lighten and therefore quicken the blade with minimal or no loss in blade strength. The modern approach Jerry has taken is innovative, sound and aesthetically pleasing. I, personally, have not put this blade to a test which would make the effects of CBT stand out but I'm sure someone who has will speak up soon.
 
They grew on me, orginally I was a tad disappointed to see the bevels compared to the oringinal pictures w/o them. Then the knife came....and you look it over and swing it around(carefully) and run your hands down the bevels. And ya think "this is a pretty bad @SS knife". So then ya go chop with it and delimb with it and the more ya use it the more used to the bevels ya get. I rather like them as not only do they work and think my FBM is a fantastic chopper but they set the knife apart...no other big knife I have has those. Anyone who doesnt know Busse or knives for that matter are interested in the bevels and they become an interesting conversation piece.

I would agree that having an option to have them or not on there would have been nice. However I gaurantee I would not have gotten them, and feel confident that given the choice many others would not have also, and would have missed out on how well they work(IMHO).

+1 on this. :thumbup: ...And they DO grow on ya! :D
 
Less surface contact = Less friction

True. At low speeds, friction is proportional to surface areas in contact (and to the surface roughness).

To answer Tyrkon, we must make assumptions:

1) The CNC was actually set to remove surface metal around the corrugation areas rather than to add material at those locations (likely -- as you can tell by running your finger across the corrugated section).

2) The blade's geometry in the corrugation regions is basically rectilinear.

Then, we simply measure the height of the corrugations (on the deepest edge), the distance between corrugations, and the width of a corrugation. There seem to be 8 corrugation ridges. Staring at the blade with my eyes, I believe the material removed is shaped like a long, triangular prism. One can approximate the volume of such a prism by calculating the volume of a rectangular prism whose width is equal to the longest edge of the triangular prism (width times depth times length times one half = volume of triangular prism). Eight of these prisms would approximately equal the volume of material removed (not exactly, though -- take a closer look at the blade profile and you'll see this over-estimates). Multiplying this volume figure by the density of steel (all steels have a very similar density, I believe) and you'll get your weight savings.

When you're done, I think you'll find very little mass was removed.
 
True. At low speeds, friction is proportional to surface areas in contact (and to the surface roughness).

To answer Tyrkon, we must make assumptions:

1) The CNC was actually set to remove surface metal around the corrugation areas rather than to add material at those locations (likely -- as you can tell by running your finger across the corrugated section).

2) The blade's geometry in the corrugation regions is basically rectilinear.

Then, we simply measure the height of the corrugations (on the deepest edge), the distance between corrugations, and the width of a corrugation. There seem to be 8 corrugation ridges. Staring at the blade with my eyes, I believe the material removed is shaped like a long, triangular prism. One can approximate the volume of such a prism by calculating the volume of a rectangular prism whose width is equal to the longest edge of the triangular prism (width times depth times length times one half = volume of triangular prism). Eight of these prisms would approximately equal the volume of material removed (not exactly, though -- take a closer look at the blade profile and you'll see this over-estimates). Multiplying this volume figure by the density of steel (all steels have a very similar density, I believe) and you'll get your weight savings.

When you're done, I think you'll find very little mass was removed.


My brane hutz.
 
The biggest drawback for me is that CBT equals no Satin or DCBB, at least from Busse.

Rick
 
Aside from reducing friction and lightening the blade, I think they are beautiful.
FBM003.jpg

FBM004.jpg
 
Thanks to the infinite information available on the internet (I don't know where my ASTM book is right now) the widely accepted density of steel is 490 lbs/ft^3 meaning that 0.22 in^3 would have to be removed to lessen the weight by 1 oz. So if you removed a 1 inch strip, about 7 inches in length and 1/32 in. deep that would be about an ounce.
 
You guys are bringing it.

I am sure Jerry and crew have the testing data somewhere for this. Does anyone have a link to when the CBTs were first introduced? Maybe there is something mentioned there.

OP: I figured that the weight reduction was negligible. But the friction reduction seemed more important IMHO. I wonder if the CBTs also work as little blood grooves on a deep thrust.
 
I simply choose to believe Jerry when he posted that the CBT strengthens the blade lateraly.... That's what I remember, anyway... Something about TONS of bending force needed to bend/break a Hell Razor... I bought 3 back then. :)

I do think they give the blade a 'retro' look, and don't hurt in my applications...
 
Personally, I like the look of them on my CGFBM, and I'm glad G19G26 did not. I'm not sure how they affect the friction of it as it has yet to be initiated. I'm saving it for a very special task.

Lagarto
 
Hey, ole Fizerics, what is the volume of steel removed?

Someone could check the displacement volume of each in H2O. Someone else, who owns one of each with the same blade and coating thickness.

Better yet, they could be weighed, if they have the same handle size and material too, in addition to the above.

But what do I know? I'm just the village baker.
 
Either way I bet the weight difference before and after would not be noticeable by human hands. Well at least not by mine. But If you did a series of chops using blades with and without you could measure the depth of each cut. Or be really accurate and rig a set up that would do the chopping with the same force each time. But I'd settle to do the chopping myself.Either way, I like'em with and without.
 
Alternatively, doesn't more surface area overall, plus peaks, translate to more drag/snag is softer materials? Not that you're actually going to be chopping rubber blocks or anything!
 
I found during yesterday's chopping spree that the FFBM was prone to getting stuck in the wood while the CGFBM didn't jam up once. The FFBM did dig in a little more, but not by much!
 
I found during yesterday's chopping spree that the FFBM was prone to getting stuck in the wood while the CGFBM didn't jam up once. The FFBM did dig in a little more, but not by much!

The reason why the CGFBM did not stick much is because the primary bevel on it is fairly thick. This is especially true in the areas of the corrugated bevels.

The area where the first CB starts mics at .183. The same area of the FFBM mics at .14. The first corrugation is only about 1/2" away from the cutting edge and it acts like a wedge preventing it from penetrating too deeply. This can be a advantage or disadvantage depending on the material you are cutting.
 
You guys are bringing it.

I am sure Jerry and crew have the testing data somewhere for this. Does anyone have a link to when the CBTs were first introduced? Maybe there is something mentioned there.

OP: I figured that the weight reduction was negligible. But the friction reduction seemed more important IMHO. I wonder if the CBTs also work as little blood grooves on a deep thrust.

huh. i always pictured jerry and garth drinkin in the shop while grinding. garth passes out while leaning on the grinding wheel and it skids across the blade leaving a groove.

jerry watches all this, sees the single bevel, but is so loaded it appears to be eight. he says, "cool. nice work hog!"

the next day, mostly sober, jerry sees the fbm proto with only one bevel. confused, he orders garth to bring him the eight beveled fbm from the night before for a closer inspection without the aid of scotch goggles. garth, not wanting to disappoint, produces the final production version of the fbm with cbt's.
 
Back
Top