Heats, solutions, carbides etc... I am back and stirring the pot

[Kevin R. Cashen]

...Kevin, Leonardo's horse in Milano was cast in NY state and you might still be able to get small reproductions from that foundry. Was the MI horse made there too ??

I have only been to the gardens to see it once, here is an excerpt from an article on it:

The late Charles Dent, an air-line pilot and amateur sculptor in Pennsylvania became intrigued with the story of da Vinci's horse and decided to adopt Leonardo's unfinished project. He started a foundation that raised $US 6 million to re-invent the 13 ton bronze statue that was unveiled with great ceremony in Milan last month. Whilst there has been much publicity about this event, few realize that the statue sent to Milan is in fact, a second casting and the original horse was revealed yesterday 7th October 1999 at the Frederik Meijer Gardens in Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Those living in this part of the country would know of the Meijer chain of stores, it is Michigan's version of Walmart which also generated incredible wealth for the Meijer family so that they could afford the original horse. The botanical exhibits there are also quite breath taking. I saw the horse when I took my son there for the one of the best indoor butterfly exhibits I know of; hundreds of tropical butterflies in an indoor environment that includes palm and bamboo groves and water falls.

 

[Daniel Koster]

Just FYI....

In Leonardo's time Science WAS Art....and Art WAS Science.




Kevin - I know you're resistant to setting down specific rules/instructions to follow....why is that? Do you feel like you then become accountable for those facts - to everyone that tries to follow them?

Is there another way to lay out the info?

I am imagining a large spreadsheet.....where on the left is a column of "ideal instructions" (ie. the very best you can do for that particular steel)....and it moves to the right where there's a column of "just enough to get buy" instructions.

The problem with disclosing the philosophical and highly scientific reasoning...is that we (generally speaking) cannot truly appreciate the conclusions. Not nearly "pearls before swine"...but almost.

I share your quest....but what good is it if it takes me 10 years to "get there"....when it could have been shortened to 1 yr of guided tests/trials/research?


It's akin to asking grade schoolers to "discover algebra" on their own..."Yes, you've confirmed algebra to exist and to be true...but it's up to the individual child to discover it for themselves"....just doesn't feel right.


Please don't take my post as a rant...it is not...it is more of a plea...

:thumbup:

 

[A C Richards]

Daniel.
Most of the research Kevin has been talking about has already been done for us. The metals industry has extensive instructions on how to best treat their steel. It only takes a search to find it and figure out how best to HT your steel of choice. If a maker is using unknown steel then it is up to them to figure out the best way to HT each type they use. Also if you are doing something outside the norm IE Hamons edge quench or the like then it may take some extra messing around with the HT.

 

[Daniel Koster]

Yes - agreed. I have my recommended heat-treats from the manufacturers...and follow them the best I can.

But how many of those steels are manufactured specifically for making knives? Haven't we just discovered by trial/error/analysis which steels are best for knives? and then made assumptions based on experience? I agree that what Kevin is doing is turning us back to the hard data/facts...demystifying the rudimentary science - and I agree it is helpful.

Just that whenever these things come up...it sets me thinking...and questioning my own processes...yes, I did go back and check my books...


There just seems to be a giant gaping hole in the literature on heat-treating knifemaking steels....how else can we learn except by hearsay?

 

[sunshadow]

Tai, back in my early days at Timken there were blind workers who did pproduction hardness tests on bearings . They used sets of hardness testing files and I assume they were very adept at determining file hardness.....Kevin, Leonardo's horse in Milano was cast in NY state and you might still be able to get small reproductions from that foundry. Was the MI horse made there too ??

speaking of Leonardo, when I was working on my Masters degree some of my color reaseach led me to Leonardo, and I became truly impressed with what I found . . .
he basically invented modern science so that he could paint more realistically!
Seriously, he laid the groundworks of several scientific disciplines so that he could more accurately make art.
sound familiar?
BTW if you want a truly entertaining read of someone who did some amazing metalwork, Benvenuto Cellini's autobiography is a hoot!

now back to your reularly scheduled discourse

-Page

 

[Larrin]

Larrin I do have some images. I will be heat treating again tomorrow, which is always a day filled with waiting. I will see what I can do.

Thanks Kevin, I just noticed I forgot to thank you for posting up the images. As you know I'm always interested in metallurgical information.

 

[bluejaunte]

When all is said and done, I love this quote:

"I hand out information like cheap guns to an oppressed population."

Poetry! :thumbup:

 

[mete]

Cellini was Europe's expert in investment casting [lost wax] but when he saw items that the Inca's made he said 'compared to them I know nothing' !!

 

[Matthew Gregory]

he basically invented modern science so that he could paint more realistically!
Seriously, he laid the groundworks of several scientific disciplines so that he could more accurately make art.

He didn't invent it, but he certainly discovered a lot of it. Art is science, and science is art. Da Vinci broke it down to the denominators (I know that's what you meant, too, Page).

Kevin, I know you know I know what you meant - just thought it might be important for you to extrapolate, so your wording couldn't be confused. As you can see, it wasn't too hard to make it sound different than you meant.
Also, my second point addresses Mr. Koster's query. We've been having this same discussion since someone " ...caught me alone at Ashokan and told me how angry he was to have all the bladesmithing books he had bought reduced to drivel in a few hours time." Why is it that these books were the only ones someone had access to?
Your signature line says it all, however most of us likely won't allow you to dodge that so easily...
...which, of course, leads me to the inevitable question... when will I get the chance to proofread Chapter One for you? (NOW who's stirring the pot?)

Back to the topic at hand!

What kind of an effect does this have on the simpler steels, such as one of your favorites, 1084? Any chance you might have some slides of 'deception' for a knifemaker NOT using chromium steels?

 

[Matthew Gregory]

Let's all get a hot poker and stir our quenching medium...

I'm in! Choose your poison, Tai! Mine will be this marvelous cup of Kenyan AA I just poured out of my press, a tasty gift from my lil' buddy Spike Mangler!

 

[Tai Goo]

If your concept of hardness testing with a file simply means to pick up any old file laying on the bench and seeing if it skates on the edge of a blade, then your concept is no good and your method is no good. That’s the real problem. Obviously, it won’t tell you much more than the blade hardened to some unknown degree. This is an over simplification.

As Mete has said there are or at least used to be sets of hardness testing files, which is one better way of doing it. However, there is another way with normal everyday files. First you need some samples of steel of known hardness and composition to compare hardness with. Without something to compare to you are just spitting in the dark. Also you need at least 2 files, one dull and one new sharp file. The dull file is best or most sensitive at lower hardness. The dull file starts to skate at lower hardnesses. The sharp file is best at higher hardnesses, and starts to skate at higher harnesses. There is a difference between starting to skate and completely skating, that can be felt with some practice. There are other factors or variables,… how course or smooth the file is, the amount of surface area and contact, the amount of pressure and the sound that the file makes. This type of testing does require some experience, and it won’t tell you everything you need to know. However it is better, and if you combine it with other types of hardness testing like chopping hardwood etc,… you can get great results. As Kevin has suggested, scratch or abrasion testing is just one type. Yet I have never had one of my blades deform in an impact type test or the likes, that passed my file testing. This is because I give the steel plenty of soak time.

Kevin the only “truth” you or I will ever know is subjective, because our interpretation of the facts and conclusions are subjective,… or from within ourselves. You try and use metallurgy as your base for authority. Your facts are fine, but your interpretation and application of the facts and your conclusions are subjective, which often leads to error. It’s like looking at a situation and saying , I see what the problem is,… it’s “2+2=“, so the answer is “4“. I must be correct. However, if the problem wasn’t factored correctly, but instead the problem was really, “1+2+3=”, then the correct answer is really “6”, not “4”,… and you were in error.

"I am not interested in telling people how to make their knives, my goal is to uncover the truth about what happens when they do." Kevin

How would you know what people do when they make knives, unless you stood there and watched each time? I think you make too many assumptions, which lead to continual error on your part. In essence you become your own worse enemy, and contribute to the nonsense with which you yourself hate.

What's my motivation here?... Just to screw with my own head. LOL

 

[Tai Goo]

Kevin, another problem you seem to have is with your "concept of intuition". Intuition doesn’t just come out of thin air. It is an instantaneous "mathematical calculation", that draws on every recourse we have available to us, which comes to us through the 5 senses, and is able to deal with an amazing amount information. It enables us to predict the outcome of an event before it happens. It’s a real human capability, and mechanism. There is nothing magical or mystical about it.

 

[Kevin R. Cashen]

…Kevin - I know you're resistant to setting down specific rules/instructions to follow....why is that? Do you feel like you then become accountable for those facts - to everyone that tries to follow them?

The reason that I don’t set them down is because there are none to set. Nitwits telling people that there is one secret formula that will allow everything to work in making a knife is why it is so difficult to objectively discuss these concepts today. Not only does the recipe change with every steel, it changes with every piece of the same steel if it didn’t have the exact same history. There are no simple answers, if I tried to give out oversimplified answers to as a panacea I would indeed be no different than the jokers who would prefer to be your exclusive source to all the secrets of knifemaking.

What favors have I done anybody if I just tell them step by step how to do it? The best thing anybody ever did for me was to hit me with so much contrary information that it pissed me off. This then gave me the drive and motivation to learn more on my own then they ever could have taught me. I am being a little more accommodating than that when I present the bad news and then give whatever information I have on the subject.

The problem with disclosing the philosophical and highly scientific reasoning...

This is the second time it has been suggested that I wax philosophical??? I feel quite the opposite, I like to leave philosophy to the touchy-feely folks and religion. If I use more eloquent words and styles to present this stuff it is because metallurgy is a dry as a popcorn fart, and I wouldn’t blade anybody for ignoring it all if I presented it like it is written in the books.

I share your quest....but what good is it if it takes me 10 years to "get there"....when it could have been shortened to 1 yr of guided tests/trials/research?

If a friend cuts your learning from 20 years to 10 he has done you a great favor, if he takes it down to a day or even a year he has done a great disservice, by denying you your own personal growth and achievement and making you a slave to his doctrine. That may be philosophical but entirely true. If somebody wants to paint a picture they can get a painter to show them the tools and how to mix primary colors, but if they then are told every exact step in applying the paint to canvas what is the point? Who’ painting is it? What have the really learned? How is it any different than paint by numbers, when you wanted to be the next Da Vinci?

I will lay all the tools at your feet that you want but it really is up to you to learn how to use them in your particular situations. If that doesn’t work out for anybody they always have all those how to guides that are already out there, but I would expect to see them doing the exact same things they settle with today 20 years from now.

As training officer on a fire dept. I angers me when other officers try to do things for the rookies in training, they will start the apparatus for them and put things in gear, or put their packs on them I tell them to get out of there! Make them new guys do everything themsleves! And when they can do it, I will then change things on them and make then deal with the unexpected all on their own. I sincerely hope I am saving a life by making them figure it out on their own. We have SOP's if they follow them they will be good with OSHA, if they follow their learned experince they will be good to themselves (and maybe not get me hurt on a scene)

Please don't take my post as a rant...it is not...it is more of a plea...

:thumbup:

:thumbup: I understand entirely, I thrive on constructive feedback such as yours.

 

[Kevin R. Cashen]

Daniel.
Most of the research Kevin has been talking about has already been done for us. The metals industry has extensive instructions on how to best treat their steel. It only takes a search to find it and figure out how best to HT your steel of choice. If a maker is using unknown steel then it is up to them to figure out the best way to HT each type they use. Also if you are doing something outside the norm IE Hamons edge quench or the like then it may take some extra messing around with the HT.

BINGO! Thank you sir! The vast majority of what I put out there is nothing new and can be found in any local library.

Yes - agreed. I have my recommended heat-treats from the manufacturers...and follow them the best I can.

But how many of those steels are manufactured specifically for making knives? Haven't we just discovered by trial/error/analysis which steels are best for knives? and then made assumptions based on experience? I agree that what Kevin is doing is turning us back to the hard data/facts...demystifying the rudimentary science - and I agree it is helpful.

But that is a myth invented by knifemakers who want to feel special because they are charting “Unknown Territory”. Steel is steel no matter what shape it is in, the chemistry remains the same, I know you know this Daniel but many fall into that trap. Yes there are certain steels that will work much better for knives, but once you find them the treating specs will still work on knives. If we as makers decide to deviate from those standard methods then we are charting unknown territory and are on our own, but it doesn’t mean the specs are wrong.

Just that whenever these things come up...it sets me thinking...and questioning my own processes...yes, I did go back and check my books...

That is a good thing! Rejoice and go with it! Whenever we stop questioning our process we are in trouble.

There just seems to be a giant gaping hole in the literature on heat-treating knifemaking steels....how else can we learn except by hearsay?

As per my paragraph above, there is no gaping hole on heat treating knifemaking steels some guys want us to believe that so they can be the special ones to fill those imaginary holes but we have all we need already there for us to use. It is both complicated and very simple. A few powerful tools and a lifetime to learn how to use them, but there are no great secrets.

 

[Kevin R. Cashen]

...
Back to the topic at hand!

What kind of an effect does this have on the simpler steels, such as one of your favorites, 1084? Any chance you might have some slides of 'deception' for a knifemaker NOT using chromium steels?

That is why I highly recommend it, it is not necesarrily my favorite, but I highly recommend it, it is alost perfect in the strucures that it forms on heating. Heating to non magnetic will have much better results with such a simple steel. There would be no reason for heavy seperation of the carbon consituents in annealing operations. Things dissolve quickly and do not complicate matters by making multiple things when comming out of solution. If all I had was a camp fire, a magnet and a can of oil I would wish for a piece of 1084 every time.

 

[Matthew Gregory]

That is why I highly recommend it, it is not necesarrily my favorite, but I highly recommend it, it is alost perfect in the strucures that it forms on heating. Heating to non magnetic will have much better results with such a simple steel. There would be no reason for heavy seperation of the carbon consituents in annealing operations. Things dissolve quickly and do not complicate matters by making multiple things when comming out of solution. If all I had was a camp fire, a magnet and a can of oil I would wish for a piece of 1084 every time.

Ah! Here's what needed from you to make my point! (You're so predictable!)

... the moral of the story so far is to use the steel that not only fits the function, but also to use the steel that fits the capabilities of the maker. If you want a knife to do x, and can only afford to use a torch to heat treat, it is likely in your best interests to remain simple (in both process AND steel), rather than looking towards an alloy that is much more complex. I don't use 5160, or 01, or 52100, or anything other than the really basic steels -- because I don't currently have the means to properly heat treat them. As my means and understanding progress, I'm sure my choices of materials will, also. However, right now I'm a 1084 guy.
It's my understanding that your pictures (and the MS class you just taught) were meant to convey that 'conventional wisdom' isn't necessarily wisdom, nor should it be described as acceptable through convention, either - if you're willing to step out of the knifemaking realm and into the much broader realm of conventional metal treatment.
I recently had this same discussion with a tool and die journeyman from the local Ford plant, and his conclusions followed this thread pretty much to a glove-like fit. We discussed all sorts of things (flame hardening being the big topic), and he was flat-out appalled by the practices of some of us 'knifemakers'... he must have said "Why?" while shaking his head fifty times!

 

[Sam Salvati]

and he was flat-out appalled by the practices of some of us 'knifemakers'... he must have said "Why?" while shaking his head fifty times!

LOL

 

[Barkes Knife Shop]

Thanks Kevin for the information and the photo's. :thumbup:

 

[Tai Goo]

I'm in! Choose your poison, Tai! Mine will be this marvelous cup of Kenyan AA I just poured out of my press, a tasty gift from my lil' buddy Spike Mangler!

I don't need poison. I am my own poison... LOL

I don't think, therefore I am! ha ha ha

 

[Tai Goo]

I guess I've screwed with my own head enough for one day. I might be done...