Heat Treatment - Crystal Weaving Foundation

Semantic slinging isn't a goal of this thread.

marcinek said:
Exactly! :thumbup: The only thing that should vary is the thing you are trying to test.

The Spyderco Mule Team Project does a nice job of that....



http://www.spyderco.com/edge-u-cation/index.php?item=13

But, even for that there is more than one variable....steel type and hardness.

So it is a challenge. But it is necessary to call something science.

Again, though, your observations are interesting and informative and there is nothing "wrong" with them.

They are what they are...but they aren't "science."
Click to expand...
 
bluntcut said:
Semantic slinging isn't a goal of this thread.
Click to expand...

You claimed what you are doing is science. It isn't. Sorry. That's not semantics.

Your methods and results aren't scientific.

And discussing the validity of your method and results certainly are fair game.

Or did you just expect us to just blindly accept what you claim to be true (and I'm not at all sure what that even is..)

This is a sophisticated audience of experienced knife users, many professional materials scientists and metallurgists, and even more professional knife makers.

You cant expect people to just accept your "scientific" claims.
 
Last edited:
bluntcut said:
Re-ht is possible and mostly be fine. However small risks: re-ht won't fix serious microstructure flaws, such as micro;nano cracks from prev-ht unless heat up beyond welding temperature.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. If you're interested, let me know & I'll provide a Millie or two to test so we can reduce the variables as much as possible.
 
Thanks, Marcinek:thumbup: Your points are well taken.

Part of this thread's objective is to declare/bring_up implications, while acceptance/approval is quite low on the list.

A CWF matrix (or whatever name or no name) fracture surface resemblance a cloth tear - I stated/shared this in MANY posts on BF before and show some micrographs as well. My 3.5yrs R&D has been very cost already, so I am not about to formalize this that for another year + a lot of head-butting with established metallurgical and people consensus. So, once I deem (about 6 months ago) my finding is beyond BCMW's IP, contribute to the world was the logical outcome. I just want to open this door for others to go through and explore beyond today ht limitations (crystal manipulation) - that's right, I show this path - not all be all.

Just for imagine (ok day dream or mare) for a short moment about the implication if CWF actually isn't BS but fact. That's right, 99% of today high-performance blades will be sub-par. New generation $2 knife can easily out perform today high-end blades.
marcinek said:
You claimed what you are doing is science. It isn't. Sorry. That's not semantics.

Your methods and results aren't scientific.

And discussing the validity of your method and results certainly are fair game.

Or did you just expect us to just blindly accept what you claim to be true (and I'm not at all sure what that even is..)

This is a sophisticated audience of experienced knife users, many professional materials scientists and metallurgists, and even more professional knife makers.

You cant expect people to just accept your "scientific" claims.
Click to expand...
 
marcinek said:
You claimed what you are doing is science. It isn't. Sorry. That's not semantics.

Your methods and results aren't scientific.

And discussing the validity of your method and results certainly are fair game.

Or did you just expect us to just blindly accept what you claim to be true (and I'm not at all sure what that even is..)

This is a sophisticated audience of experienced knife users, many professional materials scientists and metallurgists, and even more professional knife makers.

You cant expect people to just accept your "scientific" claims.
Click to expand...

Marci I think you've made your point. May I suggest that if you don't like the approach or direction or terminology chosen by the OP (for whom English may not be his 1st language) rather than derail his thread perhaps simply not participate in it?

I for one would like to hear what the man has to say. :thumbup:
 
Nathan the Machinist said:
Marci I think you've made your point. May I suggest that if you don't like the approach or direction or terminology chosen by the OP (for whom English may not be his 1st language) rather than derail his thread perhaps simply not participate in it?

I for one would like to hear what the man has to say. :thumbup:
Click to expand...

Nobody is stopping him from making his claims or you from hearing them.

I'm just unwilling to sit by idly when I am asked

bluntcut said:
Just for imagine (ok day dream or mare) for a short moment about the implication if CWF actually isn't BS but fact. That's right, 99% of today high-performance blades will be sub-par. New generation $2 knife can easily out perform today high-end blades.
Click to expand...

I'm a science guy.

Please feel free to ignore my posts if you would prefer. :thumbup:
 
Have I missed what the process was? Forgive me, but it's been a bit difficult to follow.
 
Don't undone a thing man... no matter what you do; hater's gonna hate. even though it might not be 100% proper science, I don't remember seeing too many truly scientific experiments on this fourm. Testing and sharing is how we all get better and that's the goal right?
 
I understand & actually glad for healthy & constructive skepticisms. Since replication is easy once know 'how', essential I defer prove/smiles/'doh' to you. Here is a simple scenario where a metallurgist can instantly deduce host of consequences once simple verification is done.

Verified (multiple people + machine, etc if warrant) CPM 10V and M4 UNTEMPERED hardness is 68+rc.

Deductions:
1) RA% (retained austenite) is very low, thereby matrix dislocation/stress must be very low. This rc isn't possible even if tempered at secondary hardening temper range (950+F).

2) Not brittle, therefore low dislocation matrix.

3) 1+2 indicate lath martensite but why it's tough? Ah need to use BSED (electron microscope) for to see... Once visible, how that heck martensite cells inside a grain have various ORIENTATIONS. Ah it's the 'Weaving' part of CWF.

Applied/implications (beside some obvious, there much for me to talk about on the 'why' part):
HSS - stronger & tougher at high tempered temperature (below 950F) because stronger matrix and carbide/particle coarsening is minimal.
 
Not publish yet.
T.L.E. Sharp said:
Have I missed what the process was? Forgive me, but it's been a bit difficult to follow.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I don't think, those doubts/questioned me are haters - maybe in perspective of trying to bring me back to realm of their reality. I am a business man but like to think that l've a reasonable sense to recognized when something is larger than monetization/capitalism.
rustyrazor said:
Don't undone a thing man... no matter what you do; hater's gonna hate. even though it might not be 100% proper science, I don't remember seeing too many truly scientific experiments on this fourm. Testing and sharing is how we all get better and that's the goal right?
Click to expand...
 
rustyrazor said:
Don't undone a thing man... no matter what you do; hater's gonna hate. even though it might not be 100% proper science, I don't remember seeing too many truly scientific experiments on this fourm. Testing and sharing is how we all get better and that's the goal right?
Click to expand...

Absolutely, but what we don't do is call it science......
 
marcinek said:
I'm a science guy.

Please feel free to ignore my posts if you would prefer. :thumbup:
Click to expand...

correction, you claim to be a science guy....you have given no evidence whatsoever that you are actually a scientist, so please don't state it as fact unless you can prove it otherwise:D I for one will gladly take your advice and ignore your future posts:thumbup:
 
I'm going to subscribe to this because I find it interesting even though I have no clue what's actually happening.

Sent from my D6708 using Tapatalk
 
Is it Adamantium?

Turn any low grade steel into a high grade steel? That would be pretty amazing.

Methinks some sort of powder process like carpenter? Maybe a unique heat process with slow layers of crystals weaved in.

Exciting!
 
unwisefool said:
I'm going to subscribe to this because I find it interesting even though I have no clue what's actually happening.
Click to expand...

Possibly the start of a revolution in current heat-treat practices... possibly. :)

Luong has been working for quite a while now on variations in HT and quench ("super-quench") of a WIDE variety of steels to achieve results hitherto unheardof in the knife community.

Luong understands the metallurgy involved in the HT process itself.
He understands the basic physics and the forces at work in cutting/chopping.
He understands that what he is testing is performance of the final edge-bevel of his knives and does so within easily comparable ranges (which is more than a LOT of other makers out there who BS about their products but then ascribe "abuse" to tasks as minor as carving toothpicks).
He understands repeatability and has put it to use in his own efforts to find the HT parameters that give the effect he is looking for.
He has publicly demonstrated his results, both positive and negative, when he has them.

So let's see: he's using metallurgy to establish a hypothesis and he is testing that hypothesis through experimentation, he includes controls - factory HT parameters as well as production knives, etc., and geometries well within the range for direct comparison (he has modified geometry as needed to accomplish proper comparisons where needed)... he just needs confirmation of the results that he has achieved by electron microscopy.

Am i asking to go over his lab-notebook so that i can confirm each step involved? No, nor do the reviewers of manuscripts for publication. Am I going to ask for pictures of the "crystal weave" to compare against "controls"? Absolutely.

But he is offering something that is his intellectual property and could revolutionize tool making in a BIG way - not just hobby knives but saw blades and drill-bits. 1) He is achieving hardness levels in steels expected to be unattainable without severe loss of integrity or significant increase in fragility, and then 2) he is using them at very low geometries in ways that would certainly evince the expected fragility... but he is showing significant and often superior durability!

So yes, we need independent "reviewers" of the results he is achieving, and Nathan (also known for playing with the HT parameters of steels, with a professional relationship to Peter's HT in PA) has agreed to be one such reviewer. Luong has asked repeatedly for more,

What's funny is that, I cannot seem to buy one of Luong's magical knives :) Not that i can get my hands on one of Nathan's knives either, but I have actually seen those for sale, Luong's stuff isn't out and about much. He isn't doing this for profit.
 
OK so basically metal magic!

Thank you for the explanation, now I'm definitely interested

Sent from my D6708 using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top