R&D,18th c.American axe

Kevin Houtzager said:
Convexity in a blade has probably been there for as long as axes are old.
Click to expand...

Yes,Kevin,but here's the salient part:

"American Axes. A British workman in Tasmania recently wrote to the colonial office London stating that American axes monopolizing the colonial market Mr Joseph Chamberlain secretary of for the colonies sent copies of the letter to all the chambers of commerce the manufacturing districts The Birmingham chamber discussed the at length and sorrowfully that the American style of axe the colonists and that the British manufacturers would not or could not that style One gentleman confessed that the American axe the world for quality and price that when it was driven into timber could be pulled out again an advantage that the British axe lacked This outspoken member upset the chamber which dropped subject without attempting to draft observations"


https://books.google.com/books/cont...AZQMuEc3kWg8ny80CD9Q&ci=93,107,268,439&edge=0

This is what's being discussed here.
And for me,personally,it begs a number of questions.
Main one:Why did these craftsmen,coming as they were from a number of centuries of certain tradition,from one of the foremost metalworking regions in Europe,(the Rhine valley,where anyone who could afford to went shopping for iron goods from Merovingian dynasty onward,the HF/IKEA/Amazon for the vikings and everyone else:)

So why all of a sudden Then?These people must've been fairly conservative,just by the very nature of a long unbroken linear craftsmanship tradition...They were NOT new to forging,or any of it's side-effects,(like rounding stuff up because you're sloppy:)).

Why just Then it became a Device? With other features remaining fully within a tradition of very long standing.
Look at the Kent-pattern axes,felling ones remain Very similar to this day,lugs&all even...
Sweden,another branch of that very same forging tradition,direct descendant...NO one else went There,to convex cheeks..

So why,there and then,fairly suddenly?

In all reasonableness,without going into stone axes:),two things changed that we know of:The type/size trees,and what they did with them;and the technological advances of Industrial Age...
 
My,Kevin,what Passion!:)...

Lots of wonderful data,on ALL sorts of levels and directions...(enough for a moderately-busy semester in college?:)

But(not that i don't find it All fascinating:)...What we're looking at here,specifically,are these axes that were quite solidly Pre-Industrial...
(these few known makers were in fact made obsolete by the rise of larger companies).

This is the design based on the most ancient construction methods.
(one of the more famous Merovingian artefacts is an axe welded in this very manner,box-like).

These axes were smaller,made by hand,in smaller shops,individually...Anything BUT any sort of a "made in china" event...

And,WHERESOEVER the convexity originates,it was used here very purposefully...At this period...In these locations...
(and nowhere else...not even to copy the commercial success of this later(late Industrial Age,say late 1800's /early 1900's),and even Much later...look at GB and HB and other Swedish and German-made American-pattern axes(and Finnish "Ohioan":)...All flat-sided to this day:)
Curious,no?:)
 
jake pogg said:
Yes,Kevin,but here's the salient part:

"American Axes. A British workman in Tasmania recently wrote to the colonial office London stating that American axes monopolizing the colonial market Mr Joseph Chamberlain secretary of for the colonies sent copies of the letter to all the chambers of commerce the manufacturing districts The Birmingham chamber discussed the at length and sorrowfully that the American style of axe the colonists and that the British manufacturers would not or could not that style One gentleman confessed that the American axe the world for quality and price that when it was driven into timber could be pulled out again an advantage that the British axe lacked This outspoken member upset the chamber which dropped subject without attempting to draft observations"


https://books.google.com/books/content?id=FoVRAAAAYAAJ&pg=RA4-PA20&img=1&zoom=3&hl=en&sig=ACfU3U2g61B3ATAZQMuEc3kWg8ny80CD9Q&ci=93,107,268,439&edge=0

This is what's being discussed here.
And for me,personally,it begs a number of questions.
Main one:Why did these craftsmen,coming as they were from a number of centuries of certain tradition,from one of the foremost metalworking regions in Europe,(the Rhine valley,where anyone who could afford to went shopping for iron goods from Merovingian dynasty onward,the HF/IKEA/Amazon for the vikings and everyone else:)

So why all of a sudden Then?These people must've been fairly conservative,just by the very nature of a long unbroken linear craftsmanship tradition...They were NOT new to forging,or any of it's side-effects,(like rounding stuff up because you're sloppy:)).

Why just Then it became a Device? With other features remaining fully within a tradition of very long standing.
Look at the Kent-pattern axes,felling ones remain Very similar to this day,lugs&all even...
Sweden,another branch of that very same forging tradition,direct descendant...NO one else went There,to convex cheeks..

So why,there and then,fairly suddenly?

In all reasonableness,without going into stone axes:),two things changed that we know of:The type/size trees,and what they did with them;and the technological advances of Industrial Age...
Click to expand...
I think emergence of American axe with heavy poll allowed to create next generation of well balanced, convex cheek axes. Without heavy poll convex cheek axes would be front heavy and royal pain to balance.
 
Kevin Houtzager said:
First question that comes to mind is: When was this written? Most certainly after the industrial revolution, and at least after 1783, since that was the time the British acknowledged America as a Country. The problem with that is dat during the Industrial revolution all production simplified. Mastership was no longer required. The same thing happened with the invention of gunpowder and the archer. It isn't very likely that convex edge geometry was invented by the Americans. What is likely is that found a way first to accomplish it mass production. There is a lot of evidence supporting that as well. Earliest hardened axes like the merovingians made for instance (roughly 500-800 A.D.) I'll have to search my computer if I still have photo's of the axe I had of that time period as that one is from the time of Photobucket....

The point being: It wasn't that it wasn't (therefor it is ;) ) invented before then. It just went out of fashion during the cheaper production methods of the industrial revolution. Craftsman dissappeared because of that. And in a sense America was what China is now (and Japan before the Chinese), a fairly cheap labor country. America was just the first to bring it back during the industrial revolution.

They sizes of trees weren't that different back then. Not unlike today anyway. Europe was planted with oak during the times America was first discovered by Columbus. In a sense the discovery of America is what caused the mass deforestation in Europe, allong with all its wars. Today there is practically no old forest left in Central Europe. Oldest forests over here are roughly 200 years old, with the oldest tries being roughly 400 years old. The oldest one closest to me is on church ground which was documented in 1723. But I still beleave the chestnut tree closeby is way older (only no way to know for certain as it has no documentation). Europe was also invested with yew. That was, untill the yew became in popular demand by the English and eventually the yew tax of the English in 1472. France, Belgium, Poland, Holland, Germany where full of both species, but not anymore.

And as for the Rhine valley (Ruhr): Yes, it was one of the most prolific region where ironworking was happening in Europe (but certainly not the only one), but not one of its shopping centres for the most part of its history:

Merovingian trading: Only Keulen and Aachen are Ruhr, which where the biggest hubs during the Merovingian era. The empire started there, after all.
1*vnD1f4snPD92zITEwpMO1g.jpeg

Viking trading: No shopping in the Ruhr whatsoever. Closest being Dorestad what is currently "Wijk bij Duurstede".
Dorestad_and_trade_routes.jpg

Hanze trading: Only Dortmund and Keulen (Köln /Cologne), belong to that region, and only ports where a mayor trading hub: London, Brugge, Bergen, Veliki Novgorod (triangles)
Kaart_Hanzesteden_en_handelsroutes.jpg


So all in all: Americans reinvented the convex shape after the industrial revolution. Thats the only thing you can read out of your pice in the newspaper. The same that they reinvented the double sided axe, years after it came out of fashion. But the invention of the convex edge was used long before that. Swords being a perfect example of that in ancient egypt.
Click to expand...
Wrong.
 
I think that the convexity of the cheeks is something that was probably present in at least some degree in all axes of the 19th century and earlier, but that the mode of release being talked about here was primarily a function of thickness behind the edge, both preventing over-penetration and also spreading the wood beyond the point that it could spring back from, both of which eased release. The American approach to axes differed from most European styles in that rather than being broad and thin, on average, the American sorts are comparatively narrow and thick. An overall more compact, dense shape, if you will. Most axes remained essentially hand-forged during the early industrial age, using water-driven power hammers to get the job done. During the development of this approach to geometry was probably when the high centerline effect was first noticed and then developed into a deliberately accentuated feature. But that's pure conjecture on my part.
 
There is a lot of conjecture going on here now. One thing I would strongly say to "the sizes of the trees (in North America) weren't that different back then" is AU CONTRAIRE. I dont know where that came from, but it just is not true. I dont quote obscure sources, but, I still believe that when faced with taming a land (North America) with huge expanses of huge trees, the American axe was developed, with a lot of trial and error, to compensate. By developed I mean the shape, the poll, and high center line.
 
Jake-for more relevant information on the American axe please have a look at what Henry C. Mercer had to say in his 1929 book "Ancient Carpenters' Tools". See Fig. 6-9 in particular. I still consider Mercer's research to be the last word on the subject.
 
Last edited:
Looking at it, if you welded a bit on a straight bar, folded it around a drift, welded it in the same manner as the one shown above, and then upset the poll or welded a poll cap on to square it up then it wouldn't fail at the poll like this one did.
 
jake pogg said:
Well,surprisingly,that critter did weld up for me...

Challenging deal,the entire head,all 4 pieces,had to be welded at the same time

Way out of control forging for my skinny ass ...

But so far it feels ok.Ground into all seams,surprisingly little crappy ones(i don't see Any,but know that they're there,or will be as i get tired and space out on heating).
Click to expand...

I wanted to ask about this. With my teeeny experience with forge welding this seems like an impossible task to me, welding 4 pieces all at once. Did you do this in that gas forge? For me it's always been difficult to get the pieces to the right heat at the same time without burning either of them.

What color were you heating to? Yellow-orange? About 2300°F? And did you use any sort of flux? You must have some mad forge welding skills to pull that off and have such invisible seams. I wish I could have been there to watch.
 
Wow,you guys are fantastic,what a wealth of great info,And very sound thinking as well! I absolutely can't thank you enough...Both the Mercer documentation and that broken original are worth their weight in gold.

Will read Mercer immediately,just a brief report here.
I had a shot at a thermo-cycling experiment.
All standard,according to Hoyle kind of treatment,3 normalizing cycles in a slight T reduction sequence;soak-time 1 min.;quench in warm waste-oil.
(we're dealing with junk-yard steel here,so was i even tooled-up for or capable of higher precision(dubious)it'd probably be misplaced).

Tempering was interesting.
The point of balance is right inside the eye,so in theory the mass is divided equally about there.
And indeed that's how it worked out:
https://imgur.com/jloORE6

Between the inserted heated drift,and a little help from a small propane torch from underneath,the heat soaked from the middle towards the ends at about equal rate;process never turned into any sort of a frantic circus.

However,it is a question wether the hardness of an edge and the poll hard-plating ought to be equal(as they worked out to in this case).

Imgur may or may not do it this time...But in essence i believe that an 10xx-series axe blade ought to be drawn to +/-375F,which is peacock bordering on purple in oxidation colors.The blues hard on the heels of purple is too soft,while too early in peacock/maroon color is a bit too brittle..And that's about what it worked out to,and fairly even as well.
So we're learning,on every front possible,or at least applying steady pressure....:)
 
Square_peg said:
I wanted to ask about this. With my teeeny experience with forge welding this seems like an impossible task to me, welding 4 pieces all at once. Did you do this in that gas forge? For me it's always been difficult to get the pieces to the right heat at the same time without burning either of them.

What color were you heating to? Yellow-orange? About 2300°F? And did you use any sort of flux? You must have some mad forge welding skills to pull that off and have such invisible seams. I wish I could have been there to watch.
Click to expand...


I'll try to be orderly here:

All my welding(and forging) anymore is done strictly with spruce charcoal.
(the little propane forge in the background is a friend's,and is for his,and some students' use only).
I look back at my propane-forge years with loathing...it was a sweat-shop hell of my own making...:(

Charcoal is a specific beast,and i'm learning about it constantly,both making and using it.
One specific about it(or my tree species,White spruce) is that it's very hard to reach very high temperatures...So burning is an issue mostly with higher-Carbon material.

(in tool-making in general it's always handy if the mild or WI covers the bit material entirely during welding,and i often make use of this device).

The main panacea for welding is maximal Excess of Carbon.It prevents burning,as well as scaling(thus contamination of surfaces to be welded).
I heap it on,and constantly maintain a high ratio of fuel to oxygen(with the hand-crank blower it's`easy,and it's all i use except for the rarest occasions).

I do use flux,just plain Borax out of a box,just never troubled to learn and get comfortable fluxless(it's not that hard).

Multiple-component welding is not any harder,( maybe even easier,more mass,stays hot nicely).But care must be taken to close all welds forthwith,as they'd oxidise remaining open during multiple heats.

The biggest problem with welding is to not break the freshly made welds.That is the real challenge,and it involves your capacity to retain control of the work(tongs),as well as striking control,so both hands,all senses,all you have is engaged...
(vibration,bouncing,rattling,are all very destructive).

Color i'd have a hard time with calling...Maybe shooting for bright-yellow(and achieving it sometimes?),but working in middle yellows,trying to return the fresh weld back into the fire by lower-,darker-yellow...

It's an odd thing about welding that i witnessed a number of times:After Much frustration(years),one good session with a right person just Gets you there...And then you're Good,forevermore,on your own...(a wonderful old guy by name of Dick Underwood did this for me...no new information or nothing,just said grab this,hit it now,and the magic happened...).

And then you just keep getting better on your own,it just starts happening itself...

I forge-weld a Lot,but i periodically can't stick things together to save my life(mystery...:(..),and i do Plenty of lousy or at least questionable welds...Sometimes they're not on the surface,et c.,but it's a fact(i've poor work habits/discipline).

Forge-welding is very heavily dependent on strategy of application.Two main points-use it in Shear;and maximise the contact area.This is consistent with historical use,many poor-looking,or even opening,welds,but the tool stays together/does it's intended job till worn clear out.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top