someone help me out with lateral stresses, stock thickness, and grinds, pls

Steelhed said:
You can take this to the absurd and flatten the round bar out to something as thin as foil where you would no longer have any appreciable resistance to stress in any direction
Click to expand...

They were discussing this same type of balance in Gunmike1's review of his Spyderco brand Manix folding pocket knife two weeks ago. I think one easily forgotten factor in wafer-thin blades is the effect of mass. Newton's Law that every action is met with an equal and oppositie reaction let's us know that unless the gossamer blade has some modicum of heft, chopping or piercing would be like pushing with a rope. With the needed mass, the cut is aided by the same law (as the edge presses down, the material is pressing upward just as hard along both sides of the edge).

Steelhed said:
However, I think a sweet spot exists somewhere between the round and too flat where the blade geometry is optomized for chopping and thrusting with no bad tradeoffs against the ideal for either. Knives that come to mind include some Busses like the Satin Jack Tac, Steelheart, Battle Mistress and many very good customs made along these same lines. No one is using a saber grind to win the cutting contests.
Click to expand...

I agree with you that good design can let a knife do both tasks well and with little favor of one over the other, but those tasks can still be better performed by more specialized blades (as a knife can't be both a guillotine and ice-pick simultaneously). Still, 'good enough' will always be better than have 800 blades all set for every purpose on Earth when someone has to lug them around and a thin, flattish blade with a widish clip or spear point is great at being 'good enough.'

Steelhed said:
I am not as acquainted with sword performace, but I could guess the saber grind represents the best compromise considering a sword's greater length compared to a knife and thus its exposure to higher moments of inertia and lateral stresses.
Click to expand...

There are so many types of swords and subtypes of sabers that it would all depend on the sword's use, target, and user. The smallsword often had a straight blade and was a travelling companion for those on foot, but the shamshir is a saber used both on horseback and in close-quarters combat.
 
thombrogan said:
They were discussing this same type of balance in Gunmike1's review of his Spyderco brand Manix folding pocket knife two weeks ago. I think one easily forgotten factor in wafer-thin blades is the effect of mass. Newton's Law that every action is met with an equal and oppositie reaction let's us know that unless the gossamer blade has some modicum of heft, chopping or piercing would be like pushing with a rope. With the needed mass, the cut is aided by the same law (as the edge presses down, the material is pressing upward just as hard along both sides of the edge).
Click to expand...

hmm, which is more efficient, chopping with a heavy blade, or batoning a thin blade? If you had a machete type knife, it would work for light brush better than a heavy blade, and if it could survive batoning, it could do that well-as long as it didn't bind. You also have to consider carrying the weight of the chopper vs. having to hunt down a baton (or carry one along with the thin knife) You also lose prying ability with the thinner blade, to what extent is something I'm trying to consider with this topic.
 
yeah, I've been following his work a bit. I mean light, not just thin. He told me that you want as much mass as you can swing. Sort of a balance of speed and mass, which makes sense. But, that's using the knife alone, I'm wondering if that is superior to batoning, not just in pure measurements, but practical application.

I'd maybe use a baseball bat on vermin if I had to. No sharpening out nicks after :D. I've seen what a blunt impact does to rabbit eyeballs, but that's for another time :eek:.
 
hardheart said:
hmm, which is more efficient, chopping with a heavy blade, or batoning a thin blade? If you had a machete type knife, it would work for light brush better than a heavy blade, and if it could survive batoning, it could do that well-as long as it didn't bind. You also have to consider carrying the weight of the chopper vs. having to hunt down a baton (or carry one along with the thin knife) You also lose prying ability with the thinner blade, to what extent is something I'm trying to consider with this topic.
Click to expand...

Even if the thin blade stands up to the batoning just fine, it may not be very efficient. It may tend to bind to much. Cliff noted this even on axes. He thinned out a Wetterling, if I am not mistaken and found that it was less efficient than the original, thicker profile due to binding issues.
 
I've been also thinking about surface patterns affecting that. Busse is using a corrugation pattern, though that seems it just gives the blade a clean line to break on. I wonder if an as-forged/pockmarked surface would reduce binding.
 
hardheart said:
hmm, which is more efficient, chopping with a heavy blade, or batoning a thin blade?
Click to expand...

Not comparable, it is like driving a car vs walking.

You also have to consider carrying the weight of the chopper vs. having to hunt down a baton (or carry one along with the thin knife)
Click to expand...

Large chopping knives are generally of similar weight to a small bottle of water. The effort of just static carrying is really low, this was studied a long time ago due to promotion of wrist/ankle weights for running. You expend far more energy with any significant activity.

-Cliff
 
Cliff Stamp said:
Not comparable, it is like driving a car vs walking.
Click to expand...

Is that because of the chipping out of the wood when chopping? That's what I was wondering, if driving a thin blade straight through compared to swinging a heavier blade at angles to take the wood out in pieces.

Large chopping knives are generally of similar weight to a small bottle of water. The effort of just static carrying is really low, this was studied a long time ago due to promotion of wrist/ankle weights for running. You expend far more energy with any significant activity.

-Cliff
Click to expand...

Off topic, but I guess it's ok since I started it :D, how did that study come out? I was told that weighted vests didn't work, something about how you really don't increase your speed when you remove the weight, the body had just adjusted to carying the extra load. I used 5 lb wrist weights when I was doing my chain punching drills. Really didn't seem to do much there, I'd do 500 with the weights and 500 on my canvas wall bag daily, and it felt the same after a couple weeks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top