Thermacycle : Researching Metal Treatment

[hardheart]

I quoted research papers showing test data and conclusions. Thats the premise, the data. I later discovered Busse and Stewart were doing it too, which is fairly relevant. Its not however my main premise. To suggest it is, is misleading.

You are telling people to do something you have never done. You are telling people to do something, that by your own statement, do not even know how to do properly. You have incomplete data. Yes, you did name drop to bolster your argument. No, you cannot share relevant info on how they perform the process or what specific improvements were observed. Do they actually perform cryo? maybe. Does it actually make their knives better? maybe.

note, I'm not saying Busse doesn't actually do it, or that they are doing it with no benefit. But, what has nullack presented that affirms either?

 

[nullack]

You are telling people to do something you have never done.

No Im not youve read that into it. I have provided reference to papers and results. I am currently testing it myself.

You are telling people to do something, that by your own statement, do not even know how to do properly.

Again with the strawman tactic. Theres a big difference between optimal and how to do it. No one on this planet has published optimal process, and many millions cotninues to be spent on new profiles........

Yes, you did name drop to bolster your argument. No, you cannot share relevant info on how they perform the process

Slippery slope. The premise of the argument is data, not personalities. Also, your claiming its my fault that Busse or BRKT wont disclose their profile?

or what specific improvements were observed. Do they actually perform cryo? maybe. Does it actually make their knives better? maybe.

Mike says on his disovery channel appearance his number is 200 to 400 % better wear resistance. Scientific tests show other metrics on improvements.

 

[SShepherd]

ya know....yer only argueing semantics about debating:grumpy:

the burden of proof is on you...again..to show that what you're claiming is true.

Where's Mikes data? is it somewhere we can read and see the 400% improvement?

 

[nullack]

Ive provided papers and test data. You'll have to wait for my test results, Ive booked it in for cycling - Im eager to get it back too but I cant afford to special order it through quickly.

Mike makes the comment on this video:

http://www.300below.com/video-footage.html under the discovery channel footage around 3mins 20 or so. As for his testing methodologies youd have to ask him, and please share it with us too if you find out.

 

[steelshaper]

The problem, as I see it, is you Nullack, are going by the assumption, as you yourself stated, that people, NASA, or some corporations would not spend millions of dollars on b.s. It is an unfortunate truth that yes they would. The next problem is your Data as you have given us is nothing more than Propaganda from people who have a vested interest in selling cryo treatment. Furthermore the first example comes from a source that has in the past made claims to have invented techniques that predate them. Not only that, but then filed lawsuits against others for using the word wootz.

Now I can understand the excitement you may have felt when reading these claims of 400%+ increases in wear resistance. I mean Wow I would be excited too except Logic tells me that because people can say almost anything they will. There is little to no accountability as long as the language is vague.

Brass tacks: all the so called Data you have shown is useless. Please before you continue implying that the folks here on this forum are dullards get some real facts.
I look forward to seeing your personal test results.

 

[hardheart]

No Im not youve read that into it. I have provided reference to papers and results. I am currently testing it myself.

you are on a knifemaker forum saying that you want people to share profiles and to have 'enthusiast collaboration' Seems you want knifemakers to perform cryo treatments, and to also tell you exactly how they go about doing it.

Again with the strawman tactic. Theres a big difference between optimal and how to do it. No one on this planet has published optimal process, and many millions cotninues to be spent on new profiles........

so why the expectation of a free exchange of profiles

Slippery slope. The premise of the argument is data, not personalities. Also, your claiming its my fault that Busse or BRKT wont disclose their profile?

what was the point in mentioning either if the premise is data? you don't have any from them.

Mike says on his disovery channel appearance his number is 200 to 400 % better wear resistance. Scientific tests show other metrics on improvements.

No, he said 'edge-taking' and 'edge-holding.' Exlplain what that means first, them the numbers might start to mean something.

EDIT: this is a bit on what steelshaper is talking about. Even mentioning Angelsword was a mistake if you want serious discussion of heat treating, and especially the sharing of info.
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=512459

 

[Will Leavitt]

Ssheperd -


Its a sad reflection on the character of certain people on this forum that they think they have the right to be abusive. Wills first post was nonsense, his second jumped to conclusions I havent made inferring Im a wanker. Ad hominen attacks arent logical ways to proove an argument. Then his third post is more dribble on ad hominem topics which hes now edited.

You both need to get some maturity and rational thinking skills.

I wasn't being abusive, I can be abusive.


The "wanker" emote was used to sum up my feelings about your assumption that a production company whose primary goal is profit produces a better knife than one of the assembled masses of "enthusiasts." And that we should all fall over ourselves to be like them.

You have implied that if we don't cryo or follow you and your line of thinking, our knives are "poop." I ran a series of test using cryo on the steels I used back in 2004 or so, didn't find an improvement in the simple steels I used. Soooooo you're about 5 years or more behind me in regards to this whole "cryo" thing.

Sad reflection on my character? This is an internet forum. My character is reflected in my person and my actions, not electrons on a monitor.

My first post was a joke about AF swords and their magical processes. If you were a bit more knowledgable you would've recognized it as such, my second post was directed at your comments implying that we should emulate production companies. My third post was actually very abusive and I thought better of it.

Do you get a nose bleed on that high horse of yours?

 

[Steve Hayden]

Thanks for that Steve its always good to see more papers.

Im not all that interested in minor improvements of hardness - the real benefit is to wear resistance. Besides I could work harden the blade through plastic fracturing for more hardness anyway outside of heat cycles. The toughness issue is new to me so Ill look at that. Good to see another paper confirm the small carbides structure as well.

Read the papers in full for their test methods. Thanks again.

You didn't answermy question about how the 42% increase in wear resistance was derived or inferred.

Read the report carefully. Note that the small carbides were FeCs which either had to be taken from the Martensite or from larger and harder transition metal carbides and may be involved in the loss of strength.

The reports you cite are, in general sales pitches from companies involved in the cryo business and their believers. I take papers written by in house people with scepticism.

 

[SShepherd]

Ssheperd -

1. Do you think it is necessary for hobbyists to test every aspect of engineering for themselves before its trusted? Clearly youd never make a knife before you died of old age re-inventing the wheel.

2. Since there is inconsistent test results I am going to the time and expense for me personally to test deep cryo for knives. I am in fact testing it myself, in an open and honest manner.

3. Your claim no one uses deep cryo on 52100 is utterly false.

Its a sad reflection on the character of certain people on this forum that they think they have the right to be abusive. Wills first post was nonsense, his second jumped to conclusions I havent made inferring Im a wanker. Ad hominen attacks arent logical ways to proove an argument. Then his third post is more dribble on ad hominem topics which hes now edited.

You both need to get some maturity and rational thinking skills.

and you need to stop jumping to false conclusions, and putting words on peoples mouths.........


I find it odd that if these 400%+ claims are true, that ANY industry that uses 52100 doesn't use the process ( oh I forgot, it's super secret)

thats my quote.. and I'll say it again, if they're getting 400%+ benifits from cryo WHY ISN'T EVERYONE THAT USES 52100 DOING IT. ..that's right, because it's a secret:jerkit:

I suggest you sitback stop quoting papers you can't even defend--yes posters have asked questions directly to you and recieved no answer.

Wait for your stuff to come back from the cryo process..test it, then tell us how it went.

And if your a "hobbiest" thats great.. but alot of us here have customers, and they deserve to know what we do and how we do it..alot of us spend time testing what we make to destruction. Maybe we should drag Kevin into this..nah, no need

Maybe you should do some more reading in the forum, figure out how to do a google search. Untill you have some data proving what you say is the next best thing to parks50, I'm not going to bother with this thread.
Oh, and terms like "edge taking" really don't mean anything. Quotes from the snakeoil man on how good his snake oil works isn't called anything but advertising..........especially when the word"secret" pops up

 

[micad]

nullack,

You might try contacting Paul Bos. He is a very well respected authority on this kind of stuff.

Here's the link.

http://www.buckknives.com/resources/pdf/Paul_Bos_Brochure.pdf

He has a huge amount of experience in heat treating and does a deep cryo as a part of his process.

Several years ago I had a rather lengthy conversation with him about the effects of cryo on the different steels and of the various processes he has used.

If my memory serves me (something that is ever more suspect!), he found that there were no significant gains in wear resistance at temps below about -260 deg. and that soak at temp times beyond 12 (???) hours also showed no significant gains.

-Mike-

 

[nullack]

you are on a knifemaker forum saying that you want people to share profiles and to have 'enthusiast collaboration' Seems you want knifemakers to perform cryo treatments, and to also tell you exactly how they go about doing it.

Yes I do. Thats what collaboration is. I make no apology for that. Ive also committed to sharing my results in an open and honest way, which is more than fair.

what was the point in mentioning either if the premise is data? you don't have any from them.

Its really bad science to suggest that there is no data. You are ignoring evidence from established institutions who have studied this, made observable and measurable effects.

EDIT: this is a bit on what steelshaper is talking about. Even mentioning Angelsword was a mistake if you want serious discussion of heat treating, and especially the sharing of info.
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=512459

Again your making a straw man fallacy. My inquiry is not exclusively about angel sword. Its about deep cryogenic treatment. I noticed they had a patent pending and was curious as to how it might be different to established profiles. To suggest this is somehow going to defeat my work is simply bizzare and misleading.

 

[nullack]

I wasn't being abusive, I can be abusive. The "wanker" emote was used to sum up my feelings about your assumption........Do you get a nose bleed on that high horse of yours?

You really cant help yourself can you Will. Your comments are full of ad hominen attacks that dont prove your argument and do prove your ugly character.

You have implied that if we don't cryo or follow you and your line of thinking, our knives are "poop."

No, again youve read that into it. What I said was the processing. That is not limited to cryo.

I ran a series of test using cryo on the steels I used back in 2004 or so, didn't find an improvement in the simple steels I used. Soooooo you're about 5 years or more behind me in regards to this whole "cryo" thing.

This is illogical and bad science. Good science is when more inquiry is done to understand why your getting different results to the scientific papers, to other knife makers like Mike who claim substantila benefits. Not simply resting on your laurrels after you were unable to replicate it. Whats more, the field is moving rapidly and results obtained five years ago cannot be reasonably expected to represent todays capabilities.

 

[nullack]

I find it odd that if these 400%+ claims are true, that ANY industry that uses 52100 doesn't use the process ( oh I forgot, it's super secret)

thats my quote.. and I'll say it again, if they're getting 400%+ benifits from cryo WHY ISN'T EVERYONE THAT USES 52100 DOING IT. ..that's right, because it's a secret:jerkit:"

What you actually said was a claim that no one in any industry using 52100 uses cyro - you said "that ANY industry that uses 52100 doesn't use the process". I said it before and I will say it again, thats utterly false.

If your now changing your argument to claim that no knifemaker uses cryo on 52100, again that is utterly false.

 

[nullack]

nullack,

You might try contacting Paul Bos. He is a very well respected authority on this kind of stuff.

Thanks Mike, I'll do that

I would like to understand why we are seeing these discrepencies and to have a rational process behind it that gives real conclusions.

 

[Stacy E. Apelt - Bladesmith]

A thread on a process, and its attributes/claims, has descended into name calling and finger pointing. I think all the information has been presented. Let's all sit back and think the process over, and decide for ourselves on any data has has been presented.

I am sure this will arise again, and hopefully, the process will be publicly published in some of the trade periodicals.

The reason that no medical discovery or research study is considered valid until it is published for peer revue in the major journals, like JAMA, AJS, or the ASM, is that until you publish an article that promotes the results and not your proprietary procedure, it is going to always be suspect. Seeing an article in Popular Science does not mean that the scientific community agrees with it (or that it even works - Remember the flying car?). Seeing it in a peer revue trade publication implies that it has more worth.

I think this thread needs to rest.
Stacy

 

[Mark Williams]

This thread is worthless.