-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
folded steel performance??
- Thread starter jrpsycho
- Start date
Eh?
Folded steel?
You mean like damascus, only made from ONE steel?
To do that, you have to forge weld the steel and that is because of the high temperatures in NO way beneficial to the qualities of modern tool steels. Plus running the chances of having cold shuts or slag inclusions. Who would do that and say to produce a better blade this way? In a normal damascus you may combine the qualities of two different steels which you normally can't have in one blade plus getting a nice surface design on the blade, but the only common practice where only one steel is used and forge welded to make a blade is wire rope damascus. And even here it's done for surface design and not for quality.
It just doesn't make any sense. And yes, i read this ad on the back side of the august copy of blade magazine, too.
Achim
Folded steel?
You mean like damascus, only made from ONE steel?
To do that, you have to forge weld the steel and that is because of the high temperatures in NO way beneficial to the qualities of modern tool steels. Plus running the chances of having cold shuts or slag inclusions. Who would do that and say to produce a better blade this way? In a normal damascus you may combine the qualities of two different steels which you normally can't have in one blade plus getting a nice surface design on the blade, but the only common practice where only one steel is used and forge welded to make a blade is wire rope damascus. And even here it's done for surface design and not for quality.
It just doesn't make any sense. And yes, i read this ad on the back side of the august copy of blade magazine, too.
Achim
- Joined
- May 27, 1999
- Messages
- 31
You will find that this attitude is common amongst the sword crowd. With 1000 years of propaganda behind them, and movie misinformation as well, many feel this way about Japanese style weapons in particular.
Put in context of ancient times, it was neccesary to make decent steel in qty. large enough to make a sword from tamahagane. Today, it is as Achim said, no point other than cosmetic. No performance advantage, appearance difference only, assuming it was well done, and did not introduce a bunch of crud and/or bad welds.
Modern steel does not benefit from this.
I would somewhat disagree about combining the properties of two different steels in "normal" pattern welded steel. What you get is a "mechanical alloy" with nice cosmetics if the materials are chosen well. It is possible to play with the total carbon content, and to some degree the materials can retain their original identity, but the bar that results in the end will be neither one, nor both, but an average of the two in many ways. Materials do not retain their original properties very well in some ways after pattern welding. Most of the effort in that area is to develop a contrast between the materials so that you can easily see the pattern. Certainly in some instances, some interesting properties can be achieved, but most of the point is the appearance.
Put in context of ancient times, it was neccesary to make decent steel in qty. large enough to make a sword from tamahagane. Today, it is as Achim said, no point other than cosmetic. No performance advantage, appearance difference only, assuming it was well done, and did not introduce a bunch of crud and/or bad welds.
Modern steel does not benefit from this.
I would somewhat disagree about combining the properties of two different steels in "normal" pattern welded steel. What you get is a "mechanical alloy" with nice cosmetics if the materials are chosen well. It is possible to play with the total carbon content, and to some degree the materials can retain their original identity, but the bar that results in the end will be neither one, nor both, but an average of the two in many ways. Materials do not retain their original properties very well in some ways after pattern welding. Most of the effort in that area is to develop a contrast between the materials so that you can easily see the pattern. Certainly in some instances, some interesting properties can be achieved, but most of the point is the appearance.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 1999
- Messages
- 804
I'd have to disagree with you on this. Laminated steels do have the benefit of smaller, more refined grain structure within the seperate laminations. This happens with any composite material. Take plywood as an example. A well-laminated piece of plywood will be stronger than the same thickness of solid wood in many ways. Steel has a grain in a similar fashion, and laminating it helps to limit the exploitability of that inherent weakness. The only other improvement that I can think of to laminating homogynous material is that it ends up with microfine serrations. I don't usually want those, but some folks do.
As for whether it's worth it or not, that's a different story. It's a LOT of work, and the improvement on modern steels isn't often noticable when you come down to it, depending on the steel.
------------------
Oz
"Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken!"
http://www.freespeech.org/oz/
As for whether it's worth it or not, that's a different story. It's a LOT of work, and the improvement on modern steels isn't often noticable when you come down to it, depending on the steel.
------------------
Oz
"Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken!"
http://www.freespeech.org/oz/
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2000
- Messages
- 31
It is my understanding that the steel was folded to even out the carbon content so as to make a blade with uniform hardness and toughness after heat treatment. Modern steel technology has come a long way since then. Processes such as powdered metallurgy have not only made the alloy/carbon exact but have also refined the grain structure of the steel.I believe that modern steel, forged (or ground), properly heat treated, will out perform those old folded steels.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 1999
- Messages
- 804
Carbon migration was one reason for laminating. Modern steels will outperform ancient blades when they're made with comparable craftsmanship, but modern carbon steels still benefit from lamination for the reasons that I've stated. The laminating processes were arrived at seperately by several different cultures because they did not have alloying technologies to the extent that they needed. Modern tool steels benefit from laminating, IMHO, due to structural reasons rather than composition.
------------------
Oz
"Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken!"
http://www.freespeech.org/oz/
------------------
Oz
"Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken!"
http://www.freespeech.org/oz/
Sorry, Oz, but i have to correct you. In NO way it is possible to compare wood and steel. Wood is a fibrous (!), grown, organic material with a very uneven structure. Steel is a material with a very even crystalline structure. And the smaller, refined grain doesn't come from forging or laminating, but only, and really only, from the right heat treating. I had several discussions with different metallurgists and bladesmiths about the subject and i see no way to come around the reality of chemics and physics. What makes the forged blade better than the stock removal blade is restructuring and not the refining of the grain. And you will get this effect if the steel is laminated or not.
The laminations in the old, otherwise homogenous blades came from the need to clean, refine and compact the spongious iron/steel which was made in small earthen ovens.
Achim
The laminations in the old, otherwise homogenous blades came from the need to clean, refine and compact the spongious iron/steel which was made in small earthen ovens.
Achim
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2000
- Messages
- 615
It's also worth mentioning that the problem of uneven distribution of carbon within the matrix can also be resolved with proper thermal treatments. It has nothing to do with folding, welding, or powdered metallurgy magic.
I've mentioned in the past that one of the things normalizing does aside from grain refinement, is allow for even distribution of carbon. That got shot down with a comment that normalizing puts the steel in its "normal state, period", whatever that was supposed to mean. That may not have been on this forum -- I don't recall. Rather than argue the point, I opted to just let it ride.
This time, instead of putting it in my own words, I'll quote directly from the book. Note that this information relates to simple carbon and low alloy steels.
Normalizing: The process of normalizing consists of heating to a temperature above A3 and allowing the part to cool in still air. The actual temperature required for this depends on the composition of the steel, but is usually around 1600 degrees F. (870 degress C). Actually the term normalize does not describe the purpose. The process might be more accurately described as a homogenizing or grain-refining treatment. Within any piece of steel, the composition is usually not uniform throughout. That is, one area may have more carbon than the area adjacent to it. These compositional differences affect the way in which the steel will respond to heat treatment. If it is heated to a high temperature, the carbon can readily diffuse throughout and the result is a reasonably uniform composition from one area to the next. The steel is then more homogenous and will respond to the heat treatment in a more uniform way.
The information is from a booklet compiled by and received from ABS master smith, Bert Gaston. The bibliography cites the books "Elementary Metallurgy and Metallography", by Arthur M. Shrager, "The Complete Metalsmith", by Tim McCreight, and "Heat Treaters Guide", produced by the American Society for Metals, as sources for some of the research.
I've mentioned in the past that one of the things normalizing does aside from grain refinement, is allow for even distribution of carbon. That got shot down with a comment that normalizing puts the steel in its "normal state, period", whatever that was supposed to mean. That may not have been on this forum -- I don't recall. Rather than argue the point, I opted to just let it ride.
This time, instead of putting it in my own words, I'll quote directly from the book. Note that this information relates to simple carbon and low alloy steels.
Normalizing: The process of normalizing consists of heating to a temperature above A3 and allowing the part to cool in still air. The actual temperature required for this depends on the composition of the steel, but is usually around 1600 degrees F. (870 degress C). Actually the term normalize does not describe the purpose. The process might be more accurately described as a homogenizing or grain-refining treatment. Within any piece of steel, the composition is usually not uniform throughout. That is, one area may have more carbon than the area adjacent to it. These compositional differences affect the way in which the steel will respond to heat treatment. If it is heated to a high temperature, the carbon can readily diffuse throughout and the result is a reasonably uniform composition from one area to the next. The steel is then more homogenous and will respond to the heat treatment in a more uniform way.
The information is from a booklet compiled by and received from ABS master smith, Bert Gaston. The bibliography cites the books "Elementary Metallurgy and Metallography", by Arthur M. Shrager, "The Complete Metalsmith", by Tim McCreight, and "Heat Treaters Guide", produced by the American Society for Metals, as sources for some of the research.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 1999
- Messages
- 804
I cannot begin to address how many ways I've been misenterpreted here, but I'll try.
Grain structures in wood and metal CAN be compared, but not quite so directly as my comparison obviously sounded to you, AchimW. My point on this was that many small pieces of material are stronger than one large one. The grain of metal and wood has the similarity of giving both an inherent weakness. Laminating either helps to counteract this weakness. End comparison.
Primos, my point on carbon migration was that this USED to be why it was done. Historically speaking. Even distribution of carbon was more easily done by welding and carburizing than other methods that are known now. We know now that thermal treatments will evenly distribute carbides, but the vikings and japanese did not know this at the time, along with the reason of not having the resources that we have today.
I maintain that a homogenous laminated blade will indeed be stronger than a homogenous non-laminated blade of comparable craftsmanship and thermal treatment.
Again, I still don't think the benefits are worth the work or risk, but that doesn't mean that they aren't there.
------------------
Oz
"Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken!"
http://www.freespeech.org/oz/
[This message has been edited by Osbourn (edited 08-04-2000).]
Grain structures in wood and metal CAN be compared, but not quite so directly as my comparison obviously sounded to you, AchimW. My point on this was that many small pieces of material are stronger than one large one. The grain of metal and wood has the similarity of giving both an inherent weakness. Laminating either helps to counteract this weakness. End comparison.
Primos, my point on carbon migration was that this USED to be why it was done. Historically speaking. Even distribution of carbon was more easily done by welding and carburizing than other methods that are known now. We know now that thermal treatments will evenly distribute carbides, but the vikings and japanese did not know this at the time, along with the reason of not having the resources that we have today.
I maintain that a homogenous laminated blade will indeed be stronger than a homogenous non-laminated blade of comparable craftsmanship and thermal treatment.
Again, I still don't think the benefits are worth the work or risk, but that doesn't mean that they aren't there.
------------------
Oz
"Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken!"
http://www.freespeech.org/oz/
[This message has been edited by Osbourn (edited 08-04-2000).]
- Joined
- May 27, 1999
- Messages
- 31
Oz, on what would you base this claim that laminated blades of the same compostion will be stronger than a single piece of the same material ? Have you broken any comparable blades with controlled geometry and heat treatments to say this. I have, I think you are wrong. If you get laminations that have "separateness", you have to have included some foreign material in the weld, that does not help strength, trust me. If there is no crud in the weld, then it more or less ceases to exist in terms of what it does to the physical properties of the steel. Steel is not wood, and refining the microstructure will erase much if not all of the evidence of lamination if there is no foriegn material in the weld zone, and no difference in the composition of the layers.
If you place a thin pure nickel barrier sheet bewteen your component steels, they will remain in their original state, and be laminated together as you describe, and if the amount of nickel is small enough, there is no deleterious effect from it's presence for the cutting ability, but there is not much change in physical properties either. Add enough nickel to change the properties, and then you have soft areas that are detrimental, in my opinion.
We disagree on this for sure. I am open to evidence however. It would directly contradict 13 years of full time smithing expeience, and many dozens of broken blade comparisons, not just my own pattern welded steel, either, I have checked a few other's work in similar fashion. There can be differences, but I do not see it as superior or beneficial in any way, aside from the increase in interesting appearance.
This is a complex subject, and there remain many unanswered questions. Scientific method can help sort out the answers, but it is a lot of work to set up a valid comparison experiment. Having worked with JD Verhoeven on some things, to satistfy the scientific and research community, the experiemnt must be designed and carried out with care and controls, this is not easy, but it is neccesary to get valid data.
If you have such data, I would be most interested in seeing it.
I have not done "real" experiments on this partiucular issue of comparison, and will not claim otherwise. I have broken many, many blades of both types, however, and can find no support in my experience for your position.
Lots of things are happening in a forge weld. What they are, exactly, depends on your methods and tools and temperatures and time too. Real hard to make controlled comparisons, especially between steels made by different people in different shops on different equipment.
Pattern welded steel is very cool, and it can be very good, but I do not believe it is better, and I have made more than 4000# of it over the years. I know Daryl Meier has made more, and suspect that Devin is close if not over that, and maybe Tim Zowada, most, however, have not had anywhere near that much practice. I am not full of sh*t here. Nor do I claim to know everything. I learn every day, and there is much left to learn.
"The more I know, the more I know I don't know"
Disagreement and debate are cool things, carry on, please
If you place a thin pure nickel barrier sheet bewteen your component steels, they will remain in their original state, and be laminated together as you describe, and if the amount of nickel is small enough, there is no deleterious effect from it's presence for the cutting ability, but there is not much change in physical properties either. Add enough nickel to change the properties, and then you have soft areas that are detrimental, in my opinion.
We disagree on this for sure. I am open to evidence however. It would directly contradict 13 years of full time smithing expeience, and many dozens of broken blade comparisons, not just my own pattern welded steel, either, I have checked a few other's work in similar fashion. There can be differences, but I do not see it as superior or beneficial in any way, aside from the increase in interesting appearance.
This is a complex subject, and there remain many unanswered questions. Scientific method can help sort out the answers, but it is a lot of work to set up a valid comparison experiment. Having worked with JD Verhoeven on some things, to satistfy the scientific and research community, the experiemnt must be designed and carried out with care and controls, this is not easy, but it is neccesary to get valid data.
If you have such data, I would be most interested in seeing it.
I have not done "real" experiments on this partiucular issue of comparison, and will not claim otherwise. I have broken many, many blades of both types, however, and can find no support in my experience for your position.
Lots of things are happening in a forge weld. What they are, exactly, depends on your methods and tools and temperatures and time too. Real hard to make controlled comparisons, especially between steels made by different people in different shops on different equipment.
Pattern welded steel is very cool, and it can be very good, but I do not believe it is better, and I have made more than 4000# of it over the years. I know Daryl Meier has made more, and suspect that Devin is close if not over that, and maybe Tim Zowada, most, however, have not had anywhere near that much practice. I am not full of sh*t here. Nor do I claim to know everything. I learn every day, and there is much left to learn.
"The more I know, the more I know I don't know"
Disagreement and debate are cool things, carry on, please
- Joined
- Jun 27, 1999
- Messages
- 804
Being only a part time smith, and a fairly new one at that, I can't come anywhere near your qualifications on this, but I have done some experimentation. As I've said here, the improvement is not a great one. But what I am saying is that when you weld steel, the grain structure does not become constant unless intentional thermal treatment makes it so. More thermal treatment than blades normally go through. Otherwise there would not be a visible pattern. As you say, debate is cool, so rather than rehash both of our presented viewpoints, which I think I'd rather agree to disagree on at this point, I'd like to present a question. Without adding a foreign material, why are laminations in homogenous materials visible? If the material is all identical, from one carbide to another, and they share the same structure, with no difference or separation between laminations, shouldn't there be no difference visible?
------------------
Oz
"Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken!"
http://www.freespeech.org/oz/
[This message has been edited by Osbourn (edited 08-04-2000).]
------------------
Oz
"Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken!"
http://www.freespeech.org/oz/
[This message has been edited by Osbourn (edited 08-04-2000).]
After reading these posts, what effect does annealing have on the blade. Won't anealing induce the very thing that we are trying to avoid, which is "grain growth".
A lot of makers fully anneal a blade after forging, doesn't this wipe out all the thermal cycling we have just worked so hard to put ito the steel?
Shouldn't a normalize after the forging, and once again after grinding, and before heat treat be a better option?
------------------
Sola Fide
A lot of makers fully anneal a blade after forging, doesn't this wipe out all the thermal cycling we have just worked so hard to put ito the steel?
Shouldn't a normalize after the forging, and once again after grinding, and before heat treat be a better option?
------------------
Sola Fide
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2000
- Messages
- 615
Good thread. I'm enjoying this.
Howard,
I'm glad to see you here. I've got a lot of respect for you man. Wish you could get Poindexter, Randal, and "Grandpa" Mier over here.
Oz,
My comment was not meant to be a poke at you. No offense intended at all. This is a good healthy exchange of information and opinions. I mean, Wow!, a difference of opinion on BladeForums with no mud slinging or name calling -- cool. Maybe we should all be diplomats.
Definition of a diplomat - A person with the ability to tell you to go to hell in such a way that you're actually looking forward to the trip.
mikeS,
Annealing doesn't cause grain growth because you're not holding the steel above A3. Taking the steel to slightly above A3, allowing austenite to form, then immediately beginning the slow cool produces small grain size, good ductility, and a softer steel - easier to grind, drill, etc.
Terry Primos
Howard,
I'm glad to see you here. I've got a lot of respect for you man. Wish you could get Poindexter, Randal, and "Grandpa" Mier over here.
Oz,
My comment was not meant to be a poke at you. No offense intended at all. This is a good healthy exchange of information and opinions. I mean, Wow!, a difference of opinion on BladeForums with no mud slinging or name calling -- cool. Maybe we should all be diplomats.
Definition of a diplomat - A person with the ability to tell you to go to hell in such a way that you're actually looking forward to the trip.
mikeS,
Annealing doesn't cause grain growth because you're not holding the steel above A3. Taking the steel to slightly above A3, allowing austenite to form, then immediately beginning the slow cool produces small grain size, good ductility, and a softer steel - easier to grind, drill, etc.
Terry Primos
- Joined
- Jun 27, 1999
- Messages
- 804
No offense taken, Primos, what you said just let me know that I may not have been very clear.
At the risk of injuring my position in the debate, it's entirely possible that I'm wrong. I'm enjoying the debate in any case, and expect to learn no matter what.
------------------
Oz
"Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken!"
http://www.freespeech.org/oz/
At the risk of injuring my position in the debate, it's entirely possible that I'm wrong. I'm enjoying the debate in any case, and expect to learn no matter what.
------------------
Oz
"Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken!"
http://www.freespeech.org/oz/