Hypereutectoid steel

I'm sure that to the uneducated outside observer or critic, my process must look like,... I heated the blade up cherry red, dunked it in a bucket of oil and then baked it in an oven. :D
 
Kevin R. Cashen said:
You Tai! Like countless other threads, you are the main problem in this thread! But I will at least give you this, that is the first time you have actually tried addressing a specific point instead of just acting like the village idiot in order to derail any thread that doesn’t amuse you.



Tai I got news for you, after your behavior ever since you showed up here I couldn’t care less what you like or what bothers you! And since you have never gave a rip about bothering others I have serious doubts that there are many reading this who feel any differently than I do about your approval!

I haven’t included any of my personal techniques here. What we have been discussing is not my approach, it is just some of that mainstream science that until now you claimed was your problem. So let me get this straight, now you’re cool with metallurgy if we just stick to scientific fact? What happened to your weekly anti-science troll tirade? Are you even capable of coherent thought from day to day?

Mete is a good guy who gives very good input from a slightly different angle than I do. But he doesn’t have to work in the professional knifemaking field and put up with all the garbage that has been inflicted upon it by little tin gods such as yourself whose feeble prestige relies upon perpetuating ignorance. You seem concerned about misinterpretation of this information, if there is one thing that I have learned it is that if I don’t point out exactly how that happens with my “little digs” and “pet peeves”, some glory hound or kool aide drinker will be all over it for their "personal agendas." I like to put the facts out there and make them too uncomfortable for some huckster to use as a throne. And more often than not it is a great way to get the jump on the “well I heard/read/saw the opposite from Joe Bladesmith the famous knifemaker”. If I explain right from the get go how things have been minsinterpreted maybe I can avoid being pitted directly against good old Joe.

Kind of like I endured your endless insults until now to avoid looking like anything but a nice guy, but there comes a time when nice guys have to take a stand and let the chips fall where they may and push back a bit to say what countless people have been repeating to me off forum- Tai knock it off already! You are like a stray dog wandering from forum to forum scattering garbage and cocking your leg on anything that doesn’t meet your approval. Then you wandered in here shortly after Don Fogg banned you from his forum (very impressive by the way, how does one top that? Get bitched slapped by Gandhi?:confused:), and very soon the most civil and informative bladesmith forum on the net was littered with hijacked threads and derisive nonsense. Much of my recent commentary on the tone of this forum was a gentle attempt at dancing around this issue. You have your own forum on another site, why don’t you entertain yourself there?

And for the folks who feel I have no right to talk to Tai this way because of the wonderful knives he makes, I tried that and got over it and I wish you would too! Yes I like the look of some of his knives but what does that have to do with him being a disruptive jerk? When he is making a great knife call him a great knifemaker, but when he is being a sphincter, he is just being a sphincter.

Now I have went and done it and took on everybody’s favorite toxic clown, the moderators can slap me down for finally doing it or they could consider this thread alone as an example of what I am talking about. This thread was nothing but friendly questions and answers with tons of positive feedback about the information being exchanged, it turned on a dime the moment a post appeared with “Tai Goo” at the top, and within a page here we are bickering and squabbling with the original topic all but forgotten. I wonder if you can count all of the threads that have followed the same template for the last year? And I know I am not alone when I say that I am tired of it!
Click to expand...


Amen to that. Knock the shit off Tai or I'll start gigging you as a troll. Enough is enough.
 
Glory Halleluja. If I stayed up for three weeks with a dictionary, I couldn't have come up with anything better than Kevin did when he decided "enough-is-enough".

I truly appreciate all the time and effort you put into your informative posts. Even though I am a little on the slow side, enough is sinking in so that I have been able to improve my understandings of what is happening with my blade steel at various stages of the process.

Thanks Kevin,

Robert
 
I believe it is a measure of Kevin being a "nice guy" that he has held his peace this long.
That said, the fact he has been the target of the harassment meant it was his to finally call quit.
I am glad you did, Kevin. And, I am glad Mark has backed you up with his authority.
Thank you both. And, Kevin, know you are not alone in your feelings at all. While many may not say anything, you nonetheless have their support.
Perhaps, now, those of us interested in the metallurgy involved with knife making can go back to the excellent discussions we had in the past. They need to be repeated at intervals to expose newer seekers to the principles. And, we all continue to learn every time it is discussed, regardless of the path we choose to make knives.
 
Thank you Mark!
Kevin, in one of the recent posts (app 3-4 days ago), you spoke of lath and plate being determined by the amount of heat.
In reference to:
Verhoeven Metallurgy of steel >pg25
0% to 0.6% C martensite is lath.
%C above 1% is plate.
0.6 to to 1% mixture of both.
In getting back to the topic of this thread, of hypo-hyper would you explain if Verhoeven is talking about 1060 vs 1095 steel or if he is talking about temperature and the amount of carbon going into solution.
And would you go into detail on this
1) how heat could be controled to determine a %of c solution?
2) if 1095 could ever be lath? (if it was a 1%c steel instead of .95%) hypotheticaly.
3) a good description of "Banded" steel. (and no, I didn't ask that to make anyone angry.)
 
Kevin,

Fantastic information. I get so excited every time I see a thread started by you. Your topics are presented so well. Thank you for sharing your knowledge.

Eric
 
lcf said:
Thank you Mark!
Kevin, in one of the recent posts (app 3-4 days ago), you spoke of lath and plate being determined by the amount of heat.
In reference to:
Verhoeven Metallurgy of steel >pg25
0% to 0.6% C martensite is lath.
%C above 1% is plate.
0.6 to to 1% mixture of both.
In getting back to the topic of this thread, of hypo-hyper would you explain if Verhoeven is talking about 1060 vs 1095 steel or if he is talking about temperature and the amount of carbon going into solution.
And would you go into detail on this
1) how heat could be controled to determine a %of c solution?
2) if 1095 could ever be lath? (if it was a 1%c steel instead of .95%) hypotheticaly.
3) a good description of "Banded" steel. (and no, I didn't ask that to make anyone angry.)
Click to expand...

Wow there is an awful lot in that short little post. Where to begin...
First my mention of martensite morphologies relation to temperature, the thing is that Ms is a function of chemistry so it is much more practical to look at lathe versus plate as a result of carbon content [[[[[[[[
 
Last edited:
Wow... lots of info to digest here! :)

I have been trying to find the answers to these questions on my own, but I'll just throw them in here and see what you folks have to say.

So I take a piece of O1 round stock and forge it to shape, knock the scale off, and throw it in the salt bath at 1700F, then 1600, then 1500, then 1400 (cooling to black between each heat). Rough grind, then heat in salt to 1475F for 15 minutes after the salts equalize. Quench in AAA.

Second piece I forge to shape, run through some descending heats in the forge, knock the scale off, then put in the salt at 1600F and cool to black a couple times. Then heat to 1500F in the Paragon and slow cool (50F per hour). Rough grind, then heat to 1475 in the salt, soak for 15 minutes and then quench in AAA.

Third piece, I take a piece of as received O1 PG barstock, cut and grind to shape, heat to 1475F in the salt for 15 minutes and quench in AAA.


Which one...at least in theory, is the best piece? What did I achieve with each one?

Just for the record, I've done this for realsies... and the hardness all came out the same on my import tester (I think it's the same one you have Kevin). The blades SEEMED to cut the same to me... but there was all kinds of human error involved... I would like to put all three on a CATRA and see what happens.

The first piece... simply cycling in the salts is by far the most efficient in my shop... but I don't know which is best.

Any help and advice is appreciated :)


THANKS! :)
 
#1 - puts carbides in best condition and minimizes grain size.
#2 - A lot of extra HT to no improvement
#3 - OK if prior HT is OK.
 
Mete said... "He keeps using the same pictures!"

Kevin R. Cashen said:
That is so true!:o
Click to expand...

I've seen that picture a lot. Everytime I see it the discussion is a little different. Pretty soon here, because it is the same picture, I'm going to get all of what is being said about it.

Mike
 
You metalurgist types make it worth the price of admision here EVERY DAY. Although, this is coming from someone who's dream occupation is an archeometalurgist.

Thanks for the science that explains my(our) obsession. You guys rock. :thumbup:
 
Thanks Mete! :cool: :D

I forgot to say that in #3 the stock was Starrett (if memory serves me) precision ground bar that was supposed to be in a spheroidal annealed state.

Thank you for sticking around here, your career full of knowledge is greatly appreciated! :D :thumbup:
 
I have a headache. I think I'll wait until this thread is slowing down, then print it out and start studying it, using my highlighter to mark the information that I need to learn. Then I'll take those things that I highlighted and start making notes on them. Then I'll organize the notes in a way to help me organize it in my mind. There is a lot of great information being shared here.

My hats off to Kevin. Thanks!!
 
Nick, you don't really want precision ground. It doesn't do much for you especially if you forge. You do want annealed.You do want decarb free. But precision dimensions cost a lot and doesn't help if you grind or forge it away. McMaster Carr has IIRC a decarb free version at about half the cost of the precision ground.
 
Nick,
I've noticed that sometimes (with deep hardening steels) just cooling to black may not be enough to cause transformation. You have to make sure it regains magnetism, and for the first couple cycles, this may not happen until it gets down to 500 degrees or so. You probably already know that, but you didn't mention it, so I thought I should. :)


NickWheeler said:
Wow... lots of info to digest here! :)

I have been trying to find the answers to these questions on my own, but I'll just throw them in here and see what you folks have to say.

So I take a piece of O1 round stock and forge it to shape, knock the scale off, and throw it in the salt bath at 1700F, then 1600, then 1500, then 1400 (cooling to black between each heat). Rough grind, then heat in salt to 1475F for 15 minutes after the salts equalize. Quench in AAA.

Second piece I forge to shape, run through some descending heats in the forge, knock the scale off, then put in the salt at 1600F and cool to black a couple times. Then heat to 1500F in the Paragon and slow cool (50F per hour). Rough grind, then heat to 1475 in the salt, soak for 15 minutes and then quench in AAA.

Third piece, I take a piece of as received O1 PG barstock, cut and grind to shape, heat to 1475F in the salt for 15 minutes and quench in AAA.


Which one...at least in theory, is the best piece? What did I achieve with each one?

Just for the record, I've done this for realsies... and the hardness all came out the same on my import tester (I think it's the same one you have Kevin). The blades SEEMED to cut the same to me... but there was all kinds of human error involved... I would like to put all three on a CATRA and see what happens.

The first piece... simply cycling in the salts is by far the most efficient in my shop... but I don't know which is best.

Any help and advice is appreciated :)


THANKS! :)
Click to expand...
 
Everytime I think I am beginning to get it I find out there is another layer under the layer I just learned. Thanks for the great post.
 
Oh, haha, I agree mete! :) I still do quite a bit of stock removal as well, and that was how the third blade for formed. I normally don't do too much forging with O1, but I have a few rounds and do sometimes.

Phillip, good catch! I mis-spoke there! What I mean is let it cool to near room temp as I'm waiting for the salts to get down to my target temperature. I always say black because the color is all gone and they're still toasty, but not too hot to hold in your hand. Glad you mentioned that as "black" just means it's cooled down enough to lose color. Thanks! :)
 
Thanks a heap for startin' this thread, Kevin. I slowly pick up another nugget of info each time I read this stuff. If you start a thread like this every month, maybe I'll have a decent grasp of it before I die. :D (Only meaning my feeble possum brain can't handle much in one sitting; Kevin can convey the info in a manner easier to digest than most.)

On a side note, I was eagerly following this thread the first couple days. I kept thinking to myself how well the thread was going; how much good info was being shared. Then I actually wondered to myself, "Did Tai Goo's computer crash or something?" I didn't think he could stand to let such a thread be. And now I see I was right. Tai, I respect your creativity, design skills, and metalsmithing abilities. But c'mon, dude. You are not The Oracle from The Matrix. It is not your job to "unbalance" every equation you encounter and add chaos to order.
 
NickWheeler said:
Wow... lots of info to digest here! :)

I have been trying to find the answers to these questions on my own, but I'll just throw them in here and see what you folks have to say.

So I take a piece of O1 round stock and forge it to shape, knock the scale off, and throw it in the salt bath at 1700F, then 1600, then 1500, then 1400 (cooling to black between each heat). Rough grind, then heat in salt to 1475F for 15 minutes after the salts equalize. Quench in AAA.

Second piece I forge to shape, run through some descending heats in the forge, knock the scale off, then put in the salt at 1600F and cool to black a couple times. Then heat to 1500F in the Paragon and slow cool (50F per hour). Rough grind, then heat to 1475 in the salt, soak for 15 minutes and then quench in AAA.

Third piece, I take a piece of as received O1 PG barstock, cut and grind to shape, heat to 1475F in the salt for 15 minutes and quench in AAA.


Which one...at least in theory, is the best piece? What did I achieve with each one?

Just for the record, I've done this for realsies... and the hardness all came out the same on my import tester (I think it's the same one you have Kevin). The blades SEEMED to cut the same to me... but there was all kinds of human error involved... I would like to put all three on a CATRA and see what happens.

The first piece... simply cycling in the salts is by far the most efficient in my shop... but I don't know which is best.

Any help and advice is appreciated :)


THANKS! :)
Click to expand...



Also I am glade Philip was on top of the normalizing with the help of the magnet thing. Deeper hardening steels like O1 have pearlite formation so well suppressed that they need cool more than simper steels in order to get proper recrystallization. [[[[[[[[
 
Last edited:
ib2v4u said:
Everytime I think I am beginning to get it I find out there is another layer under the layer I just learned. Thanks for the great post.
Click to expand...

That is my source of enthusiasm for the metallurgical study of what we do. After I got my Mastersmith stamp I was concerned about stagnation on a plateau in my career, I feared I was limited to just various combinations of artistic expression and techniques, and knives that would do about as good as it gets with the standard bladesmith recipes I had been working with which left only blind trial an error in their further evolution. That is when I turned to metallurgy and discovered a whole new universe of endless possibilities to explore. I wouldn’t have to simply guess or fill in the blanks with my best assumptions; I had solid answers that endlessly generated new questions and a lifetime of fascinating exploration ahead of me. Just as fact is so often stranger than fiction, the real underlying processes in steel are far more fascinating and wonderful than any of the mythology or folklore I have encountered. And anytime you think you have it all figured out it will set you right on your backside and let you know ho much you still have to learn. I have found that really good information does not make you feel smart, but instead lets you know how ignorant you really are and how much more there always it so learn. Some folks may look to mete, me or others as some sort of light at the end of a long learning tunnel but I am here to tell you that all you are seeing is our flashlights shining back as we look forward into an endless abyss of knowledge yet to be acquired.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top