DLC/PVD Misinformation

[sticktodrum]

No, it's not a particularly pervasive thing, but after seeing someone actually parrot Skelton's ignorant nonsense about DLC coatings (and after reading advice from someone wiser than myself) I figured why not start this thread.

While my background in material science is limited (but not nonexistent), I know enough to make the distinction between Physical Vapor Deposition (PVD), and Diamond-Like Carbon (DLC).

Physical Vapor Deposition describes a process, by which material is deposited onto another. The initialism only describes the process, not the coating material itself.

Diamond-Like Carbon describes a type of coating material, which itself may vary. It can be applied to a surface by way of a PVD process.

Here's a thread I saw on this a long time ago, actually on CPF:

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=314537


It's surprising how much people will take at face value from a YouTube personality without even do much as looking at Wikipedia. Trying to start conspiracy theories in an attempt to look 'in the know' doesn't really help anyone.

If I've gotten something completely wrong or I'm way off base here, please feel free to say so, so I could modify the distinctions and not be under the wrong impressions.

 

[9blades]

thank you for taking the time, sticky.

 

[agile_1]

Interesting materials science topic. Based on what I have read in very cursory research (Wikipedia ) DLC coatings are produced using a variant of the PVD process.

PVD, in one of it's many forms is used for coatings of many types in a variety of industrial applications. DLC coatings are carbon coatings applied using one of the PVD processes.

The name "Diamond-Like" seems to derive from the fact that some physical properties (hardness for example) of the coatings are diamond-like. It seems that even though the atomic structure of DLC coatings is different from diamond the coating has the hardness of diamond.

PVD http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_vapor_deposition

Physical vapor deposition coating is a product that is currently being used to enhance a number of products, including automotive parts like wheels and pistons, surgical tools, drill bits, and guns. The current version of physical vapor deposition was completed in 2010 by NASA scientists at the NASA Glenn Research Center in Cleveland, Ohio. This physical vapor deposition coating is made up of thin layers of metal that are bonded together through a rig that NASA finished developing in 2010. In order to make the coating, developers put the essential ingredients into the rig, which drops the surrounding atmospheric pressure to one torr (1/760 of our everyday atmosphere). From there, the coating is heated with a plasma torch that reaches 17,540.33 degrees Fahrenheit. In the automotive world, it is the newest alternative to the chrome plating that has been used for trucks and cars for years. This is because it has been proven to increase durability and weigh less than chrome coating, which is an advantage because a vehicle's acceleration and fuel efficiency will increase. Physical vapor deposition coating is gaining in popularity for many reasons, including that it enhances a product’s durability. In fact, studies have shown that it can enhance the lifespan of an unprotected product tenfold. Variants of PVD include, in alphabetical order:

1. Cathodic Arc Deposition: In which a high-power electric arc discharged at the target (source) material blasts away some into highly ionized vapor to be deposited onto the workpiece.
2. Electron beam physical vapor deposition: In which the material to be deposited is heated to a high vapor pressure by electron bombardment in "high" vacuum and is transported by diffusion to be deposited by condensation on the (cooler) workpiece.
3. Evaporative deposition: In which the material to be deposited is heated to a high vapor pressure by electrically resistive heating in "low" vacuum.
4. Pulsed laser deposition: In which a high-power laser ablates material from the target into a vapor.
5. Sputter deposition: In which a glow plasma discharge (usually localized around the "target" by a magnet) bombards the material sputtering some away as a vapor for subsequent deposition.

DLC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond-like_carbon

Naturally occurring diamond is almost always found in the crystalline form with a purely cubic orientation of sp3 bonded carbon atoms. Sometimes there are lattice defects or inclusions of atoms of other elements that give color to the stone, but the lattice arrangement of the carbons remains cubic and bonding is purely sp3. The internal energy of the cubic polytype is slightly lower than that of the hexagonal form and growth rates from molten material in both natural and bulk synthetic diamond production methods are slow enough that the lattice structure has time to grow in the lowest energy (cubic) form that is possible for sp3 bonding of carbon atoms. In contrast, DLC is typically produced by processes in which high energy precursive carbons (e.g. in plasmas, in filtered cathodic arc deposition, in sputter deposition and in ion beam deposition) are rapidly cooled or quenched on relatively cold surfaces. In those cases cubic and hexagonal lattices can be randomly intermixed, layer by atomic layer, because there is no time available for one of the crystalline geometries to grow at the expense of the other before the atoms are "frozen" in place in the material. Amorphous DLC coatings can result that have no long-range crystalline order. Without long range order there are no brittle fracture planes, so such coatings are flexible and conformal to the underlying shape being coated, while still being as hard as diamond. In fact this property has been exploited to study atom-by-atom wear at the nanoscale in DLC.

 

[sticktodrum]

And all of that makes mincemeat of something stupid like, "They don't use true DLC, they actually use PVD." That kind of statement of fact, unfortunately, has been mindlessly accepted by many people.

A bit of cursory reading like what you posted and bolded would do well to discredit misinformation if only people would actually read it.

Thanks for posting that.

 

[agile_1]

And all of that makes mincemeat of something stupid like, "They don't use true DLC, they actually use PVD." That kind of statement of fact, unfortunately, has been mindlessly accepted by many people.

A bit of cursory reading like what you posted and bolded would do well to discredit misinformation if only people would actually read it.

Thanks for posting that.

Well yes you are right. Tons of stuff on the web about vacuum coating processes. To be voluntarily misinformed about such an accessible topic is difficult to imagine. However I have had industry experience with PVD technology and have some limited understanding of it.

Bottom line - a DLC coating is done using a PVD process.

The only real point of confusion might be in what qualifies as a Physical Vapor Deposition process. There are many deposition processes and I am not at all clear as to where the line is drawn for Physical Vapor Deposition. I suppose if you have a vacuum or controlled atmosphere and evaporate material to deposit on your substrate then it is Physical Vapor deposition.

So all of these

(e.g. in plasmas, in filtered cathodic arc deposition, in sputter deposition and in ion beam deposition)

would be PVD processes as they are done in vacuums or in controlled atmospheres, and they are used to create DLC films and coatings.

 

[kornphlake]

The industry name for DLC most commonly applied to knife blades is Tetrabond, http://www.ionbond.com/en/coating-services/cutting-tools/tetrabond/

 

[-Lucky-]

No, it's not a particularly pervasive thing, but after seeing someone actually parrot Skelton's ignorant nonsense about DLC coatings (and after reading advice from someone wiser than myself) I figured why not start this thread.

While my background in material science is limited (but not nonexistent), I know enough to make the distinction between Physical Vapor Deposition (PVD), and Diamond-Like Carbon (DLC).

Physical Vapor Deposition describes a process, by which material is deposited onto another. The initialism only describes the process, not the coating material itself.

Diamond-Like Carbon describes a type of coating material, which itself may vary. It can be applied to a surface by way of a PVD process.

Here's a thread I saw on this a long time ago, actually on CPF:

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=314537


It's surprising how much people will take at face value from a YouTube personality without even do much as looking at Wikipedia. Trying to start conspiracy theories in an attempt to look 'in the know' doesn't really help anyone.

If I've gotten something completely wrong or I'm way off base here, please feel free to say so, so I could modify the distinctions and not be under the wrong impressions.

I laughed so hard during his rant...you're essentially right. DLC is just what it says in the name...and PVD is a process.

 

[PURPLEDC]

No, it's not a particularly pervasive thing, but after seeing someone actually parrot Skelton's ignorant nonsense about DLC coatings (and after reading advice from someone wiser than myself) I figured why not start this thread.

While my background in material science is limited (but not nonexistent), I know enough to make the distinction between Physical Vapor Deposition (PVD), and Diamond-Like Carbon (DLC).

Physical Vapor Deposition describes a process, by which material is deposited onto another. The initialism only describes the process, not the coating material itself.

Diamond-Like Carbon describes a type of coating material, which itself may vary. It can be applied to a surface by way of a PVD process.

Here's a thread I saw on this a long time ago, actually on CPF:

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=314537


It's surprising how much people will take at face value from a YouTube personality without even do much as looking at Wikipedia. Trying to start conspiracy theories in an attempt to look 'in the know' doesn't really help anyone.

If I've gotten something completely wrong or I'm way off base here, please feel free to say so, so I could modify the distinctions and not be under the wrong impressions.

You know, I like Jim. He has a spotted past in the watch world and has lets say a reputation. I think he is a good speaker, has a good TV voice and he has does semi professional Youttube videos that I find interesting and entertaining. With that said I really wish he would fact check before saying certain things. In nearly any one of his videos he makes a statement that is 100% false. Many times it is hit your head on a brick wall wrong and you really want to say something. And I have tried but he seems to get defensive and starts removing subscribers. At first I dismissed some of his errors as innocent missteps but he has one of these in almost every video. Then you have his subscribers refeeding it to us and it gets tedious. I think what bothers me more than these mistakes is what I believe to be favoritism among what he collects. I have seen some of his videos where is is very critical of someones work for things I honestly cant verify even in his HD videos yet some makers seem to be able to do no wrong on knives that I can with out a doubt tell are flawed in his video.

I hate to come up with a conspiracy theory of my own but I honestly wonder if he trades good reviews for free merch. Because when i see him ranting and raving about a knife that has a blade tip peaking, poorly fit and sculpted scales and a very uneven grind as the one of the best knives he has ever handled I question the persons competence in being able to judge true quality and or their honesty. Either way I think he could have a successful venture in the knife game if he would stop pandering to his favorite makers and make sure he has his facts straight before he recklessly starts spreading miss information. Its one thing to be wrong and admit it but its a whole other scenario to habitually wrong because you dont feel you have anything left to learn. I think people in the public eye have an even greater responsibility to cross their T's and dot the I's.

 

[poolhustler]

I researched PVD a long time ago to use on a Rolex and Patek Philippe project I was working on. What I remember from the little investigation I did was that PVD is a process to apply a specific material, not the material itself like DLC. In the end it proved too expensive and we used a standard plating process.

I don't have a problem with Jim's You Tube videos as he does provide a lot of good information on some really cool knives. But I do think he rambles on too long and I also have noticed that he should be a little more informed on some information he espouses.

 

[J_Curd]

The Internet is full of people who think they know all the facts. Heck, everyone is guilty of it on occasion. However, just like medical diagnosis and politics...always do your homework.

 

[rycen]

If I'm reading this correctly you have a problem with something stated in a YouTube video correct?

 

[J_Curd]

I believe he has a problem with multiple posters stating that KAI uses "PVD" and not "DLC", in multiple posts here, and he is educating on the misinformation.

 

[Comeuppance]

If I'm reading this correctly you have a problem with something stated in a YouTube video correct?

Jim Skelton went on a tiny rant when talking about the M3900770BLK. I happened to watch that video not too long ago, so it's weird to see it referenced here. It starts at about 8:15 in this video.

 

[J_Curd]

One inconsistency sticks out here...

You know, I like Jim. He has a spotted past in the watch world and has lets say a reputation. I think he is a good speaker, has a good TV voice and he has does semi professional Youttube videos that I find interesting and entertaining. With that said I really wish he would fact check before saying certain things. In nearly any one of his videos he makes a statement that is 100% false. Many times it is hit your head on a brick wall wrong and you really want to say something. And I have tried but he seems to get defensive and starts removing subscribers. At first I dismissed some of his errors as innocent missteps but he has one of these in almost every video. Then you have his subscribers refeeding it to us and it gets tedious. I think what bothers me more than these mistakes is what I believe to be favoritism among what he collects. I have seen some of his videos where is is very critical of someones work for things I honestly cant verify even in his HD videos yet some makers seem to be able to do no wrong on knives that I can with out a doubt tell are flawed in his video.

I hate to come up with a conspiracy theory of my own but I honestly wonder if he trades good reviews for free merch. Because when i see him ranting and raving about a knife that has a blade tip peaking, poorly fit and sculpted scales and a very uneven grind as the one of the best knives he has ever handled I question the persons competence in being able to judge true quality and or their honesty. Either way I think he could have a successful venture in the knife game if he would stop pandering to his favorite makers and make sure he has his facts straight before he recklessly starts spreading miss information. Its one thing to be wrong and admit it but its a whole other scenario to habitually wrong because you dont feel you have anything left to learn. I think people in the public eye have an even greater responsibility to cross their T's and dot the I's.

From YouTube:

purpledc1Oct 24, 2013
Thanks for telling the truth about the coatings. So many a##holes challenge me on forums telling me that things like aluminum cans and other materials softer than DLC cant scratch the black DLC coating on a knife.I nearly lost my f###ing marbles.They couldnt answer my Qs as to how these knives get scratched Because if materials softer than DLC cant scratch it then how does it happen? I dont cut anything harder than dlc but I get scratches in it all the time. Thanks for not BS'ing us.

Did you change your mind with experience?

 

[TotalDbag]

If I'm reading this correctly you have a problem with something stated in a YouTube video correct?

He made this thread because the idiotic claims made by someone on YouTube has spilled over into BF. He's correcting said claims in an attempt to stop it from spreading any further within this community.

 

[MrPocketsOfSteel]

You know, I like Jim. He has a spotted past in the watch world and has lets say a reputation. I think he is a good speaker, has a good TV voice and he has does semi professional Youttube videos that I find interesting and entertaining. With that said I really wish he would fact check before saying certain things. In nearly any one of his videos he makes a statement that is 100% false. Many times it is hit your head on a brick wall wrong and you really want to say something. And I have tried but he seems to get defensive and starts removing subscribers.

****Rest of excellent post snipped for brevity****
I would have never mentioned this till I saw this thread first. I stopped watching after the third video where what he said was blatantly wrong. I'm funny that way on YT, but if someone is going to speak and act like an expert, then be an expert. Like what was said earlier, fact check, it isn't very hard. As for the merchandise for positive reviews. Well, duh!!! Of course this is all my opinion but to me it is all that matters.

 

[Buffalohump]

I personally get all my info from YT. Reading is just too much like hard work.

 

[duro]

I researched PVD a long time ago to use on a Rolex and Patek Philippe project I was working on. What I remember from the little investigation I did was that PVD is a process to apply a specific material, not the material itself like DLC. In the end it proved too expensive and we used a standard plating process.

I don't have a problem with Jim's You Tube videos as he does provide a lot of good information on some really cool knives. But I do think he rambles on too long and I also have noticed that he should be a little more informed on some information he espouses.

My takeaway from Jim's video, was that DLC is much more of an expensive, and higher wear resistant coating. You're also not going to find true DLC coatings on a 50 dollar, or even 200 dollar knife. Jim stated his experience in the watch industry. True DLC, as he stated, is much more of an expensive process then PVD.

Granted, my knowledge on the subject is limited...I take everything with a grain of salt, including this thread.

Lets keep in mind, sticktodrum was awarded a free serial #2 ZT 0600 from KAI.

 

[oregonknifenerd]

Why should we keep that in mind? If he is correct, who f-ing cares. IonBond does the coatings for KAI and I'd take their word on what it is. They get more from KAI than the value of 2 knives from KAI. A fact is a fact and even if there is a bias it doesn't change reality. Your constant need to crap on StickToDrum all over the place, while contributing nothing to the conversation, shows more bias than anything.

 

[JuJu-]

My takeaway from Jim's video, was that DLC is much more of an expensive, and higher wear resistant coating. You're also not going to find true DLC coatings on a 50 dollar, or even 200 dollar knife. Jim stated his experience in the watch industry. True DLC, as he stated, is much more of an expensive process then PVD.

Granted, my knowledge on the subject is limited...I take everything with a grain of salt, including this thread.

Lets keep in mind, sticktodrum was awarded a free serial #2 ZT 0600 from KAI.

So can we keep in mind the mostly unwarranted claims you have made concerning the 0560 and the 0600's? I'm sure I can dig them up around here somewhere...

Trying to right a wrong is all I see here. A simple reminder to check your facts. Links were provided by sticktodrum and agile_1. That's better than simply saying you know what you are talking about when you don't is it not?