Triple quench secrets to be revealed?(or not)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally posted by rdangerer


http://www.cashenblades.com/Info/TTT.html

I think bainite is the ares in this TTT curve that looks like a fingerprint, kinda gray, left of pearlite, and right of austenite.

:) good tot see my site is being looked at. Actually though, the TTT curve that I made for that page is very basic and simplified for it's purposes and does not specify the area for bainite, the finger print grey is course pearlite (I got creative). Upper bainite will start to form at around 800-850F. and as you get coller you will start to make the harder "lower" bainite until around 450F when martensite will take over if cooling continues.



...Cashen makes damascus of L6 and O1, mix of tough and an edge holder, His site says 30% L6 and 70% O1, for one of the few damascus mixes that strikes me as having a chance at any of the true (often over hyped) performance benefits from the welding of two steels.
...

It is very true that I do have my reasons for using it. I think it is more a 60/40 mix though and the math brings it to a nice .84% carbon. I have just completed the first series of in-depth tests that reinforces, in a REAL big way, why I use this mix. Preliminary testing shows some of the fabled qualites may be obtainable if done right. I need to do some more research to verify some of the unbelieveable stuff I am seeing so far about this mix, but from what I have seen so far, I do not plan on switching from this combination anytime in the future.
 
Mete,

Thanks for the explaination. It makes a lot of sense. I have another question or two if you don't mind...

According to some reading that I have been doing... When working steel at sub-critical temperature, the grains will elongate, slip and eventually fracture if worked enough. It is my understanding that the fractured grains will recrystallize when normalized at a sub-critical temerature? Unfortunately the text doesn't elaborate to say whether the recrystalization combines the fractured pieces back into it's previous grain size or if it leaves it in smaller grains. What can you tell us about grain refinement through mechanical manipulation (forging)?

It's my understanding that grain size has very much to do with the performance level of the blade. Apparently, hot working, cold working, normalizing and annealing all have the potential to refine the grain of the steel. Grain refinement through hot working and cold working would explain why a forged blade would out perform a stock removed blade of the same steel (all HT being equal, of course)?

Since DaQotah is looking for toughness, and his shop is limited to the tools that he has described, wouldn't it be a lot more feasible for him to get the toughness he desires through grain refinement as opposed to investing in the equipment necessary for him to produce Bainite? Wouldn't ultra-fine grain translate into pretty decent cutting ability as well as toughness?

What is the limit of grain size that can be produced from each of the various heat treatments and mechanical working of the steel? I'm sure it depends on the steel being used, so let's limit it to 5160 since that is what we experimented with.

Sorry, that's probably enough questions to fill a book with the answers.

Thanks,
Rick
 
I attempted to post yesterday when it crashed - probably overwhelmed by all the metallurgy.I'll see if I can remember.... Bainite requires that the steel be quenched ,in molten salt,fast enough to get past the nose of the TTT curve then held just above the Ms temp ( ~500F) until the transformation to bainite is complete.Hopefully in reasonable time , a few hours , not twenty or more .Once the transformation is complete it makes no difference how it is cooled to room temperature.....We do have three blade steels that are compatable for bainite - O1, L6, 5160. Bainite will be a few points lower in hardness than quench and temper but much tougher....Kevin ,your L6/O1 sounds very interesting , keep us informed. Could you tell us ,from the blade point of view, the characteristics of the three steels with bainite?.....In any case we have lots of choices - the better you can define your needs (not just "hardness") the better choice you can make for steel type and heat treatment.
 
Rick , you guys are too fast for me . In the time it takes to figure out how I'll explain the stuff you sneak in with another post. Your last question would take a substantial amount of research maybe a budding metallurgist would want to do that for a thesis....The first comment - we don't want fractures of any kind . We can maniplulate the steel in many ways , for example we could quench down to near the Ms temp and work it there and see an increase in strength or we could do it just below the critical.We could do it by rolling in the mill or forging. But in every case we are looking for more points of nucleation.The more points of nucleation the more (and smaller ) new grains are formed therefore improving the toughness.....When I respond to a person my comments are not necessarily just for that person.After a number of postings about hardness we finally found Daqotah really needs toughness. How do we get it? First steel choice.Second control of hardening -that means enough soaking but not excessive (5-10Min) and especially NOT EXCEEDING the recommended hardening temps and in fact keeping to the lower end of the range. Beyond that we can, depending on skill and equipment do the bainite , subcritical working etc to get further improvments. But the first points are MANDATORY.
 
For Wilkins - no grits from rice but we do make Risotto or even rice pudding. .... Which reminds me (Kevin you may use this thought in your classes) What makes ice cream texture so smooth ?? As the ice cream is frozen ( nucleating new grains ) we stir it (forge it) to permit many more points of nucleation therefore smaller grains and smoother texture....
 
Mete,

Thanks again for the reply. I am, however, having trouble understanding the difference between two smaller grains that were created through grain fracture from cold forging and subsequently recrystallized to form a new smaller grain and forming a smaller grain through "More points of nucleation.":confused:

Also, you mentioned "subcritical working etc. to get further improvements... Could you elaborate on what kind of subcritical work that can be done... Please:D :D

By this comment...

Your last question would take a substantial amount of research maybe a budding metallurgist would want to do that for a thesis

Do you mean that there is know known limits to grain size?

Thanks again,
Rick
 
Originally posted by Kevin R. Cashen
I think it is more a 60/40 mix [O1/L6] though and the math brings it to a nice .84% carbon. I have just completed the first series of in-depth tests that reinforces, in a REAL big way, why I use this mix. Preliminary testing shows some of the fabled qualites may be obtainable if done right. I need to do some more research to verify some of the unbelieveable stuff I am seeing so far about this mix, but from what I have seen so far, I do not plan on switching from this combination anytime in the future.
Very interesting stuff Kevin. Please do come back to this forum and elaborate when you feel like you have validated and reproduced the results you are seeing. Sounds like one heckuva way to build a blade, big or hunting sized, for both toughness, AND good edge retention, with the beauty of damascus. And that is a tall order. I think a number of 'smiths would appreciate hearing your insights if you don't mind sharing.

Have you ever thought about writing often enough in a magazine so that everyone's perception is that you know what you are talking about? ;) (Just kidding folks...see emoticon and toe nail)
 
Originally posted by mete
...(Kevin you may use this thought in your classes) What makes ice cream texture so smooth ?? As the ice cream is frozen ( nucleating new grains ) we stir it (forge it) to permit many more points of nucleation therefore smaller grains and smoother texture....

That is good. I had not thought of that one.

Originally posted by rdangerer
...(Very interesting stuff Kevin. Please do come back to this forum and elaborate when you feel like you have validated and reproduced the results you are seeing. Sounds like one heckuva way to build a blade, big or hunting sized, for both toughness, AND good edge retention, with the beauty of damascus. And that is a tall order. I think a number of 'smiths would appreciate hearing your insights if you don't mind sharing.

I have no problem sharing, anybody who knows me is aware that I detest "secrets" and those who claim to have them, I just think it is silly. But something I detest even more is looking like a fool becuase I jumped to premature conclusions before validating preliminary findings.

I a study that I presented 2 weeks ago, at the Ashokan seminar, I observed phenomenon in many aspects of performance (heat treat-ability, material consistancy, edge retention, impact strength and interesting observances under the microscope) of many damascus combinations. I am one of the biggest sceptics around and have never thought of damascus as anything more than just another steel, that, if done right, could be as good as the steels used in it. But my initial results have me rethinking my entire view to the point that I need to do much more study before I will have the guts to admit everything I am seeing.

One thing that I am seeing enough to admit to is somethig that I had a hunch about all along. The so called "damascus cutting affect" appears to be a reality when cutting certain mediums, not due to the hard/soft layer nonsense, but instead how this material goes dull.

Even though I always knew O1/L6 was about the best choice I personally have made for combinations, it has blind-sided me with some behavioral characterstics that are just not normal (in a good way). I really want to get some sort of clue as to the mechanism for this behavior before I start speculating in front of the masses. I think there are already way too many wild@##$% conclusions jumped to in the knife business with total lack of solid evidence, without me adding to the confusion.

Mete: I have not done any serious studies involving bainite in my mixes, but I can guarantee that with all the hype these days, I will be doing such testing.

At this point I also find it hard to resist comments about nucleation and grain refinement by mechanical deformation, since I also have ahd a keen interest in that field as of late. The grain refinement by cold working does not result in breaking up or fracturing of grains, as mete pointed out any kind of fracturing is bad and requires welding heat to fix. What happens is the grains are elongated and deformed by slip within the crystaline lattice, inducing strain energy within the lattice and lots at the grain boundaries. This all still means nothing to grain size until the steel is reheated. Then at Ac1 all of that engergy will provide points for which new tiny grains to nucleate. After they form they will begin to grow by consuming the other grains. Large grains tend to grow at the expense of smaller ones. There are a couple of hitches to this whole hammer refining idea though-

First the residual strain will reduce the recrystalization temperature and increase the rate of grain growth. It is still heat and not the hammer that does the actual transformation, and when it comes to putting engergy into a blade, a forge fire will beat even the biggest hammers hands down. There is a critical amount of cold deformation required to create these points of nucelation and there is a phenomenon known as uneven coarsening or germination that can result by putting just enough strain in to start the ball rolling but not enough to do a thorough job. A few sacattered points of higher strain will result in a few rapidly forming grains that will begin to coarsen quicker as they feed off their finer and slower brothers. In light of this I personally don't get into hammering for a few minutes at teh end of the forging at dull red. but I do get into using heat to evenly refine the grain throughout. If points of high "stress" for nucleation is what you are looking for, no hammer ever made by man can put more stress into every grain of the steel like martensite. If you want to shrink grains real fast, reheat martensitic steel to Ac1.

I guess my point is, that I would shape the steel with a hammer and leave the internal structures for the fire and heat treatments.
 
Rick, what I meant with 'limits of grain size' is that you would have to do a study by using various heat treatments and working and measure and compare the grain size. But the subject can get very complex - for example both vanadium and nitrogen ( as in S30V ) will reduce toughness HOWEVER they will reduce grain size .The grain size effects outweigh any negative effects.....Kevin, nice explanation on nucleation, I'll leave it at that....we haven't in this thread talked about grain boundary effects which is another fascinating subject. We can greatly change transformation by doing things like adding small amounts of boron.... We often forget the basic "damascus" in steel - pearlite. Soft tough ferrite alternately layered with hard brittle carbide - it works..... Also look at flaky pastry, baklava or mille foglia (thousand leaves) - alternate layers of dough and butter , made the same way , roll and fold ,roll and fold. ....Graymaker ,you could sort out the whole thread and put it in book form , it's big enough now.
 
Hello...

I am still followintg this thread. Unfortunatley family matters kept me away for a bit.

As to the comment made a while back about animostiy and that a person should not go back and pull quotes from earlier posts to prove a point...

We have all clearly seen the "Cliff Stamps" use this technique. Is it being suggested that men are not bound by their words? I hope that isn't so... If it is then this is not the site for me. Anybody who posts should be held by there statements or they should not make them.
And I will also point out that no apaologies have been offered...and this is no doubt a measure of standards of cinduct. That said..

Rick has brought up some interesting points. It would seem that metallurgy is not a perfect "science". By admission, we all know the variables involved.

Which brings me back to my original question that was ignored and to my thinking is the paramount question... bar none.

Does steel have a memory?

This question is the most basic idea, and is the root of all our questions.

If it does NOT then we should all throw down our hammers and join the guild.

If it does then Woohoo! We can all breathe easy.

If steel does not have a memory...then why do repeated quenches show multiple "temper lines"? How is it possible to imprint steel during low temp forging with a hammer so that the blade reveals "patterns" after the etch? How is it possible that the "pattern" can be manipulated during the low temp forge? How is it possible that one side reveals one hammer pattern and another not? These are just some of the questions that I have. If the fire does all of the "re-structuring" then why did so many people in Arknansas ask me what kind of Damascus my test blade was made from? It was in fact 5160...which kept some folks wondering...

I can tell you plain and simple... the steel remembers.

If you do not believe this then talk to Al Pendray, Blade Hall of Famer about Wootz. He was the one who got me thinking about therm-mechincal manipultation. Al also has some incredibly specific ways to handle the steel after the smelting process...his words...low temp...low oxygen. Why would he bother if the steel can't remember it? Was he just a "masochist"? JEEZ...I would like to hear somebody pop that one on Al.

As a point of reference...

While at the ABS school I forged at their temp. While there was no visual pyrometer, my "non-scientific" read on the heat was in the uppper orange range...a magnet would not stick and the scale fell off of the steel in sheets. I forged both 1/4" inch stock and 3/8" both by hand and on a power hammmer. I did HT on the pieces forged with MS Charlie Ochs, by triple normalizing, then heating to crit, the lower third of the blade in a forge fire and quenching the entire blade in h2o, room temp, probably somewhere about 95F..in a 5 gallon bucket. When I got back to my shop, I etched the blades. Each showed the same patterns. Long grain running the entire length of the blade. There was little or no pattern development connecting the fibres top to bottom. What I did find when during the finish grind was the "skin" of the steel was nearly impossible to cut at the surface. As I worked deeper the resistance decreased. After the quench I found some of the surface steel remaining. It would not etch in Ferric Chloride...but rather left spots of bright silver "metal" on the blade. I have no idea why.

What I can tell you is that I have never seen this on steel from large stock worked down at lower temp. What I do get is steel that show a "web pattern" top to bottom and length wise all "locked" together..or seemingly so...as measured by my naked eye...1X.
Measure this as tough and springy...do not have RC tester...just common experience.

So...lots of info...

What does all this tell you, fellas?

No animosity... just information.

Shane
 
Forgot this point about grain size....

Some remebered info from MS Charlie Ochs...
Charlie made the comment that in his studies w/ Al Pendray on 52100 they have not been able to find how small the grains can get. At one point he used the term.."infinitely small". The idea being that it was possible to achieve such small grain structure that it was difficult to measure. Charlie forges from big stock? Is he one of them "maso" fellas too?

I would submit that he knows something about steel. His practices offer another way to forge steel...specifically 52100. He recieves the reuslts he wants.Is his way better? Define better.

Is he faster? You bet. By his own account Charlie can complete blades incredibly fast. He said he uses water to harden his blades. Would any of us try that? All of the experts recommend oil quench. Charlie found a way he likes...and uses with success.

What is it Kipling said?

"There are nine and twenty ways to light the tribal lay,
and every single one of them is right!"

Roughly...wasn't that Gunga Din? Jeez been awhile

Point is these are personal decisions based on subjective experience.

What takes place in a lab...under "sterile" conditions does not account for the organic occurances in the shop.

Shane
 
There is a Ni-Ti alloy that truly has a 'memory' - bend it in a complex shape, when you then heat it ,it will return to it's original shape.....Your 'memory' may be due to a number of things. For example in embrittlement,failures may occur along prior austenite grain boundries. That is because certain elements have concentrated in those boundries......My comment about masochist comes from certain comments about doing something because they 'like to'. We have many new blade makers who blindly follow what they have heard whether that be information or misinformation and ignore the fact that they are beginners and don't have the skill or years of experience of a C.Ochs. They are much better off learning some of the hows and whys before they ever touch a blade.....Grain size , there are specific ways and standards ,ASTM, of measuring grain size by comparing fracture surface and metallographic examination( through a microscope)."infinitely small "is a meaningless term.
 
As always, I appreciate your influence. I learn some more all the time. I agree Charlie has alot of expereince with steel and blades.
I learned a lot from him as well.

You spoke of new guys not knowing much...and of following blindly.
I can speak to that with total agreement. New guys have to start
somewhere. Listening is a good way. But you are right some of them do not do their homework. Some just read all this stuff on the web and figure they have enough info to start.

Homework for me is one of the things that sometimes get neglected. Reading is one of the things that gets put off. Right now I probably have 20 experiments running or waiting for a start in the shop to answer some of my own practical questions.

I would like to comment on learning and teaching. I have had the great fortune to be taught by, and learn from some pretty incredible people. With one exception I have experienced the "Do it my way" attitude.

Ed Fowler is the exception. Most of what he has written, has always been an explaination of the methods he has attempted.Flat out, without recommendations. He will explin himself in clear terms and then allow the individual to learn through experience. It is up to the smith to decide what things are relevant...and which are not.
I try to disprove every theory I have in the shop. Rather than go on the assumption that I am correct and work to that end.

It is intersting to note the current trend to disprove thew multi quench method. Ed is the only smith who has published his results and methods. This makes a big target for anybody with a personal gripe.

I return to the idea of cat skinning.

Thanks again,

Shane
 
Kevin an Mete,

Let me see if I understood what you said...

- Forging does little if anything to refine the grain of the steel.

- If we are looking for grain refinement, we should concentrate our efforts on heat treatments.

So, we have now come full circle. It looks like the triple quench might have some merit afterall?

So, if I take some of my 5160 and I forge a blade to shape and then I use the forged blade as a template to make a stock removal blade from the same bar of steel, and subject both blades to identical heat treatment (which would include bringing the stock removed blade to the same heats that the forged blade enjoyed during the forging process), both should be idnetical in their cutting, edge flex and bending performance. That would mean that the ABS is little more than a society for edged ornamental iron workers. That would mean that the test that Wayne Goddard and Ed Fowler published in Knife Talk is hogwash. Here are the results...

Stock removed, single quenched blade - 163 total cuts.
Stock removed, triple quenched blade - 195 total cuts.
Forged, single quenched blade - 269 total cuts.
Forged, triple quenched blade - 509 total cuts.

From these test results (compliments of Ed and Wayne) it clearly looks as if triple quenching does something to improve cutting ability, however, triple quenching has the biggest effect on Forged blades. Could there be a comination effect that has been overlooked in this thread so far? I tried to bring the subject up a while back but was ignored. It seems to me that forging is doing something to the steel that cannot be acomplished by stock removal and heat treat alone. What is it:confused:

Rick
 
Kevin,

First of all, thank you for your contributions to this thread.

I may have gotten the cart before the horse so to speak with my last post.

Based on this paragraph from your last post:
There is a critical amount of cold deformation required to create these points of nucelation and there is a phenomenon known as uneven coarsening or germination that can result by putting just enough strain in to start the ball rolling but not enough to do a thorough job. A few sacattered points of higher strain will result in a few rapidly forming grains that will begin to coarsen quicker as they feed off their finer and slower brothers. In light of this I personally don't get into hammering for a few minutes at teh end of the forging at dull red. but I do get into using heat to evenly refine the grain throughout. If points of high "stress" for nucleation is what you are looking for, no hammer ever made by man can put more stress into every grain of the steel like martensite. If you want to shrink grains real fast, reheat martensitic steel to Ac1.
I guess there is some merit to cold working the steel in regards to the germination phenomenon that you wrote of? For the record, I'm not speaking of hammering at a dull red at the end of each forging heat. I am talking about forging the whole blade from a 1 1/8" round piece of stock at critical (non-magnetic) or below. Never allowing the steel to get anywhere near a temperature at which the grains can grow.

What kind of % of grain refinement are we talking about with the various thermal treatments that you speak of? As opposed to that induced by mechanical manipulation?

If steel is manipulated enough at the temps. described above, (from 1 1/8" stock or larger) would I end up with a finer grain than I would from a thinner stock (1/4" stock)all heat treatments being equal?

Rick
 
shane justice...

Hi this is DaQo'tah,

Im sorry if you think this topic looks like someone is out to get Ed,,,,But you have to understand, Im searching for a way to make my heat treatments better...

Mete has shown me some things,,,but it way too early to say if we have "learned" something, or just "noticed" something..


I have grown as a new knife maker form this topic, before I started reading the posts ,I was happy with car springs,,,,Now Im in the middle of my 2nd John Deer load shaft...

What I have learned so far is,,,,that although the single HT in our test steel, checked out at a same HRC number as the steel Heat treated 3 times,,,there WAS Something different inside the steel...

There was a change within the steel, that showed up when the steel was broken...

Why?
Why would 2 more heat treatments change the steel so much?

AND....is this the type of change that a bladesmith could use to push his blades to become better cutters?,,,

I dont know,,,,but it is a very interesting question...

something happend to the steel from the other 2 heat treatments,,,,but what?why? and could this be of help in some way with a blade that can out cut others?
 
Shane Justice,
I can forge a shaft that is one and an eighth inch round, into knives in six hours using a two and a half pound hammer.
Seriously Man, keep an eye out for a six pound sledge hammer,(they are not as common as the eight pound hammers) cut the handle off short and rasp it down it it is too thick, and try that. It will cut your time in half, and is not difficult to use once you get the action down. You will love it. For reducing large stock it cant be beat except by a eight pounder,and that does take a big boy :D to use.
 
Originally posted by Rick Baum
...I guess there is some merit to cold working the steel in regards to the germination phenomenon that you wrote of?

To the contrary, germination is a obsure term for exagerated grain growth, it would not be desireable unless you wished to have largely varying grain sizes within the work. It should be erased by subsequent normalizing or cycling.

one of my favorite demos to do is "psychic edge packing" and it is done with my tongue planted firmly in my cheek. I over-heat two pieces of steel to grossly large grain size. I heat one to a subcritical heat and hammer it rapidly as it cools. then I reheat it to just critical and quench then break it to show the refined grain. Then I reheat the the next one to critical or sub critical and toss the hammer over my shoulder and begin to wave my hand over the steel while I chant some magic jibberish. I do this perhaps twice and then heat, quench and break. The psychically packed steel is always finer and more evenly homogenous in structure. It is a bit silly but it makes the point crystal clear and my students always love it.


For the record, I'm not speaking of hammering at a dull red at the end of each forging heat.

I didn't think you were talking about the light working at the end in low temps, but this is the practice that is commonly described so I went with it.


What kind of % of grain refinement are we talking about with the various thermal treatments that you speak of? As opposed to that induced by mechanical manipulation?

If steel is manipulated enough at the temps. described above, (from 1 1/8" stock or larger) would I end up with a finer grain than I would from a thinner stock (1/4" stock)all heat treatments being equal?

Rick

This is very difficult to answer as it is like asking how "long is a piece of string?" the possible outcomes are endless, as well as the desired outcomes, depending upon the techniques and the variables therein.

either way, it is the thermal treatment that drives recrystalization and it is the thermal treament than obliterates the previous structures regardless of how they were done. One thing that must be stressed, however is that there is a point of diminishing returns on everything and you can get too much of a good thing. fine grain size is good for strength but it significantly lowers hardenability and grain coarsening temperatures. If you are succesful in gettig the grain size too fine you could find that your quench isn't quite fast enough anymore and your Rockwell numbers will be a bit dissapointing.

Believe me, the more I study this stuff the more ignorant I feel, the more metallurgy you digest the hungrier you get :( .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top