Forging Bevels from One Side

Rick Marchand

Rick Marchand

Donkey on the Edge
Moderator
Joined
Jan 6, 2005
Messages
9,680
I may get my hand slapped for this by the veteran smiths, but I accept the risk... lol.(I say this because I don't see this technique discussed, anywhere.:unsure:)

On knives whith geometry that suits this technique(mostly full flat from edge to spine and no damascus), I will hammer the majority of the bevels from one side, only flipping to straighten. At this point, it resembles a chisel grind. Afterwards, I turn the blade over, line up the opposite side to the plunge and give the ricasso a solid flat blow, essentially twisting the tang and ricasso(or blade, depending on your point of view) to be inline and centered with eachother. I find it works well but you have to make sure to normalize at least twice... you may get warp during the quench if you don't. I have not ran into any issues, yet. Like I said, it doesn't fit all blade types but it sure is a handy technique for the bladesmithing toolbox.

Here are a series of poorly drawn pics to better illustrate...

Hammer from one side, setting a deep onesided plunge.
Bevels1.png

Bevels2.png


Turn over, line up the plunge and strike the ricasso squarely.
Bevels3.png

Bevels4.png

Bevels5.png
 
That is the way I used to forge, till Bill Burke showed me the err of my ways ;)

Hold the blade at 12 degrees on the anvil and the anvil side of the bevel will begin to form while you are forging the top.

You are working yourself to death with that method! I am too lazy to do it that way anymore. I was surprised how much faster I could forge a blade by that method. I was also instructed to never forge or strike the ricasso as that is the area of the blade by which all straight lines are measured.

well that is what works for me. But I NOT slapping! I am afraid you would slap back :)
 
Last edited:
Cool Mark, thanks.
Never strike the ricasso.... that works for barstock that is already at the thickness you want... lol... just messin. I think trying to avoid the ricasso is a good idea... but more of a general suggestion than an absolute rule. Bill Burke is a hell of a smith, though. I'll have to give the 12deg thing a go. I find the one-sided method is faster than the two-sided even-steven approach... but if the 12deg is even faster, that'd be great!

Rick
 
Last edited:
Mark... just to be clear...

Am I holding the the steel at 12 degs or the steel at 6deg and my hammer face at 12deg?

12degs seems an aweful lot. How are you moving steel if most of it ins not supported. i gues I'll just have to try it. Any video by chance?
 
I hold it around 12 degrees and start forging on the edge laying on the anvil working my way to the top. It does feel strange at first because I wanted to lay the steel flat on the anvil just like all the other times. And I probably am angling the hammer head a bit, but not sure on that angle. Think of using your anvil like a grinder and the angles that you hold the steel against the platen as you flat grind. Also as the bottom edge begins to form, it begins to support the steel. I just played with it after the ABS hammer-in two years ago. Hmmmm maybe I should make a video just to see how bad I do it ;)
 
On a big blade ,like a bowie, where the edge drops significantly below the ricasso, I do sort of like Rick is suggesting. But the way I do it has some of Mark's technique in it.

To explain it in words is a bit hard, but here goes:
I do what Rick is saying, but lift the spine a tad off the anvil. It will require some hammer control at the plunge, but what happens is you are pinching the extra steel in the future edge area of the bar ,and drawing it out ( down) to make the edge bevel. This avoids making so many dings and dents in the nice flat areas that will be the upper bevels later on. I turn the blade at the beginning of each heat to set the plunge on the other side, then flip it back to the strong hand side for drawing out. As Mark pointed out, try and avoid doing any heavy hammering on areas that you want to remain flat. I do strike the ricasso, if needed, but try and hit it as straight as possible. A flat faced hammer is good here.

As Rick pointed out, this will not work on damascus.
 
Good idea Rick, if it works well for you. I'm not sure it's really any faster though, but may require a little less skill and experience... easier for some maybe.

I like to keep it even through the forging process. There are a couple methods I use depending how I want the steel to flow.

One way is to establish the plunge area first at a very steep angle working the edge portion down first, with a round dome faced hammer. By raising the angle way up like that, only a small portion of the blade is in contact with the anvil,... less resistance, and the side against the anvil is effected simultaneously with solid hammer blows from the top. Flipping the blade often helps keep it nice and even. Once I've established the edge and plunge fully centered, there's a ridge where the angle formed meets the flat, like a grind line. On the next sequence I place the ridge so it is supported by the anvil on the under side (again, a small surface area in contact with the anvil, less resistance) by decreasing the angle a little. Then strike the blade from the top along that ridge. I repeat this process working the bevels towards the back. In this scenario, you'll tend to stretch the edge in length quite a bit, (but not so much in width) which bends the blade upwards towards the back. So, you either need to do a substantial amount of counter bending first or adjust the profile with a wooden "schwocker" as you go.

The other way is to work the bevel more as a whole with a cross peen stretching the metal in width down towards the edge. With the cross peen you have a "sharp" surface on the hammer with less resistance and better penetration. Also, since you are stretching the metal more in width than length it tends not to bend towards back much and requires less counter bending and/or adjusting of the profile. I generally reserve this method for when I want more width in the finished blade.
 
Last edited:
why won't that work on damascus? just curious... I've only forged a couple damascus blades.

I suppose I do things more like Stacy...
 
Scott, it would just make the pattern uneven, or asymmetrical.

There are a couple things that concern me about Rick's approach, bending the blade at the plunge and/or knocking the ricasso and tang out of line with the blade, or "twisting". If it bent, it would just require some straightening afterwards. I think what Rick is trying to describe is more like "pivoting" the ricasso and tang, with the back of the blade as the axis. If, you were to clamp the blade in a vice and "twist" it, the back of the blade would then be out of line with tang and ricasso. There is the risk of twisting with Rick's method, which would be harder to fix than a simple bend and could really screw things up. So, Rick's way maybe faster if everything goes right, but it is running a risk towards the end of the forging process. I think keeping it straight and even as you go is safer and more prudent.

I don't think that the uneven stresses would have any noticeable effect, as long as it's normalized and stress relieved well, to prevent warpage. "Theoretically" the uneven grain flow could effect the blade's performance, (like a piece of wood with an uneven grain from side to side) but that would really be splitting hairs,... even though, I like the idea of keeping the grain flow and stresses equal, even and symmetrical as possible from start to finish.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Stacy. At times I do lift the spine... it's not as cut and dry as I presented it. I just wanted to let folks know that they have more freedom in forging than they might think. Normalizing cycles can reset the steel. The claim that every stroke is recorded is just not so. If done under sufficient forging heat the metal moves and remains fluid. I will agree that there are mistakes you can make that WILL be forever recorded, like burning out carbon or forging at too low of a temperature and causing fractures. Normalization won't heal cracks and won't reintroduce carbon into burnt out steel. I think it is good to discuss hammer techniques as I don't see many threads about this.

Tai Goo said:
Good idea Rick, if it works well for you. I'm not sure it's really any faster though, but may require a little less skill and experience... easier for some maybe.
Click to expand...
You're probably right there, bud. It only seems faster to me because it is easier at this point. I need all the help I can get.... lol. There is no better teacher than experience. I do use a combination of a few methods including the cross peen technique I've seen in your videos, Tai. I'm getting to the point where I think less of what I'm doing and more of how I want the steel to move. Zen and the art of forging. I suppose once I forget the physical part the creativity can flow.... much the same way a musician doesn't think about notes or positioning... they just play. I'm working toward that state and having fun. Thanks for the input.

ScottRoush said:
why won't that work on damascus? just curious... I've only forged a couple damascus blades.

I suppose I do things more like Stacy...
Click to expand...
I haven't done much work with damascus but I have made san mai and know that one-sided forging with make it uneven... especially when drawing out a bevel. I have used Rob Thomas' damascus and was told to forge evenly on both sides to keep a symmetrical pattern. Aside from that bit of personal experience, I'm just going by the advice from others that sounded reasonable.
 
Tai Goo said:
Scott, it would just make the pattern uneven, or asymmetrical.

There are a couple things that concern me about Rick's approach, bending the blade at the plunge and/or knocking the ricasso and tang out of line with the blade, or "twisting". If it bent, it would just require some straightening afterwards. I think what Rick is trying to describe is more like "pivoting" the ricasso and tang, with the back of the blade as the axis. If, you were to clamp the blade in a vice and "twist" it, the back of the blade would then be out of line with tang and ricasso. There is the risk of twisting with Rick's method, which would be harder to fix than a simple bend and could really screw things up. So, Rick's way maybe faster if everything goes right, but it is running a risk towards the end of the forging process. I think keeping it straight and even as you go is safer and more prudent.

I don't think that the uneven stresses would have any noticeable effect, as long as it's normalized and stress relieved well, to prevent warpage. "Theoretically" the uneven grain flow could effect the blade's performance, (like a piece of wood with an uneven grain from side to side) but that would really be splitting hairs,... even though, I like the idea of keeping the grain flow and stresses equal, even and symmetrical as possible from start to finish.
Click to expand...
Worth quoting and pondering upon... great feedback, thanks. Pivoting the ricasso/tang from the spine is exactly what I'm doing and it does leave the spine angled. Something I correct with a couple passes on the grinder or with a file.
 
The “grain flow” becomes visual with damascus. The side against the anvil gets chilled and moves less, and the top side that get's hammered on spreads out more.

I do pay attention to grain flow, because aside from "possible" thermal advantages of forging, it's really about the only other thing... not to mention establishing basic geometry and other possible complex forms more readily and efficiently.
 
Last edited:
I've bookmarked this thread--I'm ashamed of the number of forging texts I've read and had a hard time seeing what the particular benefits to their described techniques as, as described here, they did not seem particularly concerned about grain refinement or thermal conductivity of the anvil.
I've tried using Goddard's technique of beveling along the anvil edge to allow for overhang, but not been happy--something about it just doesn't feel right. Much as Rick describes, there is a definite psyche that develops at the creative moment akin to Zen or more appropriate term, Minushi.
Still, if the diverging techniques weren't difficult enough to sort out, phrasing questions has been even more frustrating. Despite my vocabulary, the nuances and specifics of what I'm doing v read has made it rather trying to articulate questions of overhang, hammer faces (when and where), and angle of approach (spine to anvil and corresponding hammer blows).
For example--Bud William's book describes using the anvil at 90 so the corner of the face over the cutting table defines the plunge, and then by using a setting hammer so there's equal force. On the other hand, Mcreighton uses a technique more similar to Tai's, but opts for a roundface peen so that, like Williams suggests, steel is evenly distributed per strike. To complicate things, I've (by pure inexperience and ignorance) ended up using a combination of Stacy and Rick's described tactics, but never said anything for the simple, shameful fact that, again, didn't know how to explain my actions other than it "felt appropriate."
It still hasn't worked though as I never can establish a clean plunge. Then again, I've only recently replaced my 0-rebound ASO for a real anvil, and so have not tried more than a little bit of playing around the past week getting a feel for it.

...I need to find a smith in my area or hit the lotto so I can visit each of you and pay for lessons...
 
Ed, I think the Zen principle you are refering to is Mushin. When I was studying the arts it was known as "no mind"(a direct translation) or "gazing at the distant mountains".

Very cool stuff.... thanks for the post.
 
Forging the bevels from both sides, alternating from side to side feels right to me. But then I am self taught and have only used this technique. I believe you develop a better overall range of motion in this way. With the edge toward you the hammer is pulled, with the edge away from you, the head of the hammer is pushed. Using this method also equals out the thermal draw, produced by contact with the anvil surface, from side to side.

One evening as I was teaching a class in the dojo, I translated the term mushin as no mind, which is literal. My teacher was in attendance that evening; he took me aside after class and with a smile told me to explain it as a mind without conscience thought. He said new students get confused when you tell them to spar with no mind. :)
I'll try this technique Rick I'm interested in how it performs.

Fred
 
Marchard Senpai,
I understand it, Minushi is a derivative of Mushin, but by conscious action and desired principle--the Buddhist monk seeks Nirvana, the Samurai seeks Minushi. "Mushin" is "the no mind" of clear action without thought--in a rough pineboard transatation/summation "going in the zone," but that's it, there are plenty of times we work without slipping into that place, and it's frustrating because you can't do it by conscious thought. Minushi is the cognizant shift, much in the same sense that sharpshooters and hardcore gamers for one reason or another slip into Delta (sleep) brainwave patterns (for a little more info, here's a brief bit on it: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20040086464_2004090499.pdf
Speaking frankly, Minushi's possible origin and introduction into Bushido begins with Matsuo Basho's (the father of modern Renku Haiku) "The Narrow Road to the Interior" where he uses metaphor to construct the argument that the Samurai and Artisan are both distracted by the human cycle: Thought, Action, Sentiment--another version of the Aristotelian modes for persuasion (Ethos, Pathos Logos) but based on the self. Thus the Artisan and Samurai must learn to cognitively learn the "Mind without Mind" because Mushin lacks control or conscious action. There's a particular folk tale told by Saikaku I'll send you in pm rather than clog your thread anymore, sir.

But, no, thank you for this thread--as a no-nothing egghead, studying books and videos of techniques lacks a certain description each of you have added to this thread. I need to get my ass in gear and order Tai's videos (basics and the 2010 hammer-in). Any others you might suggest would be welcome--Smartflix's picks are very slim outside of grinding or damascus videos.

Edit: Thank you, Rowe Sensei, you beat me to the punch and in a better fashion.
 
Fred and Ed.... we need a thread in Around The Grinder to continue our Zen and the Art of Forging discussions:thumbup:

Oops... I just noticed Ed is a Registered User.... no can see ATG.
 
I do see and frequently read ATG--but held off from upgrading membership, the prospect of a Zen and the Art of Forging would be worth the standard user account to be able to share that discussion, I'm quite sure many others would chime in and it would be a priceless education in the men I admire and hope to equal some day. Any time you want to fire that conversation up, let me know.

However, to get us back on topic...
I can say that, despite what has been said why these techniques won't work with damascus (e.g. concern for pattern) the added risks include cold shunts or delamination, I recently made some 1095/15n20 that I wasn't happy with (didn't like the pattern), so I decided to see what problems would arise from trying to forge from bar--if I plan on making the mix on a frequent basis, I thought I should make a couple test blades from it.
One of the major issues thermal loss and differential cooling rates: Forging over the edge of the anvil presents an issue as the face keeps the edge from cooling at the same rate as the spine. Without the blade evenly cooling, welds will pop.


One thought does occur to me though that might sort of work with the above described techniques, though the argument could be made that it could/should be done on a press/powerhammer/etc.
Ariel did a tutorial on how to make cable damascus without hammer marks where he sealed the cable in a stainless tube.
Theoretically, and bear with me as I struggle to describe this, but it could be possible to use some of these techniques successfully with laminate.
You know which directions will be drawn first, so cut the patterning grooves to proactively work in that direction. To prevent excess deform, thermal loss, and delamination, it could be sealed in a mild steel thing wall square stock tube wrapped in stainless foil so it doesn't weld to the canister.
 
Tai Goo said:
Forge from the spine,... not the brain.
Click to expand...
++:thumbup:

When I first started(who am I kidding?... I am still only a beginner) I read lots of article on forging and worked with Wally Hayes quite a bit. It wasn't until I had a decent set-up and spent hours a day forging for several months, that I began to understand the science and art of moving metal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top