- Joined
- Oct 18, 2001
- Messages
- 20,978
Jens - if you want to give it another shot, I'm sure there's interest (myself included).
-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
Why Are'nt We Using More RWL-34??
- Thread starter rlinger
- Start date
Dan, I am glad you brought that particular HT back up. That was not the optimum heat treating sample of the series of tests that it came from. I will look that testing marathon back up. There is a sample that I think best. It was a air quench sample. The rest I do not remember well enough to write it now. I'll go back into the archives and find it. The bulk of what you have there is accurate and only a few line changes should need to be made.
-----------
A CPM version of 154CM would be interesting for sure. The problem in us little buyers buying directly from Crucible is I don't think they like to bother with us.
RL
-----------
A CPM version of 154CM would be interesting for sure. The problem in us little buyers buying directly from Crucible is I don't think they like to bother with us.
RL
Dan, let's go with this one:
-----------
Ramp to preheat
Preheat: 1400 F. / soak 7 minutes
Ramp quickly to austenitize
1950 F. / soak 25 minutes
Rapid air quench to handling temperature (quenched 'in the packet')
Snap temper immediately: min. 300 F, max. 350 F. / 1 hour
Deep cryo: 12 hours
Temper after still air warming to room temp.: 400 F. / 2 hours
Temper: 400 F. / 2 hours
------------------------
Rockwell after snap temper before cryo: 60 HRc
Rockwell after deep cryo: 64 HRc
Rockwell after first temper: 63 HRc
Rockwell after final temper: 62.5 - 63 HRc
------------------------
Later on a real blade tempering was at 525 F for both 2 hour temper sessions. The resulting blade hardness was 61 HRc.
Fracture Picture: http://riflestocks.tripod.com/steelgrain7a.html
-----------
Ramp to preheat
Preheat: 1400 F. / soak 7 minutes
Ramp quickly to austenitize
1950 F. / soak 25 minutes
Rapid air quench to handling temperature (quenched 'in the packet')
Snap temper immediately: min. 300 F, max. 350 F. / 1 hour
Deep cryo: 12 hours
Temper after still air warming to room temp.: 400 F. / 2 hours
Temper: 400 F. / 2 hours
------------------------
Rockwell after snap temper before cryo: 60 HRc
Rockwell after deep cryo: 64 HRc
Rockwell after first temper: 63 HRc
Rockwell after final temper: 62.5 - 63 HRc
------------------------
Later on a real blade tempering was at 525 F for both 2 hour temper sessions. The resulting blade hardness was 61 HRc.
Fracture Picture: http://riflestocks.tripod.com/steelgrain7a.html
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2001
- Messages
- 20,978
Tell me what to look for in the pics, Roger. Just want to make sure I have the right idea.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2001
- Messages
- 20,978
The link to the fracture pics in Roger's post.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2001
- Messages
- 20,978
ok......I guess I don't have the right idea.....
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2001
- Messages
- 20,978
Dan - he's talking about the steel....not the, um, other thing....Dan Gray said:
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2003
- Messages
- 15,288
Tight grain ? did you quench it in beer ? Actually there is a standard for getting grain size numbers by looking at the fracture surface. But in Rogers work we looked for a fine and uniform textured fracture surface. This was more of a comparative thing .You would have to look at all the photos along with my comments to get an idea. This would also be a way to learn about the effects of temperature on grain growth - heat to different austenitizing temperatures and fracture after hardening and compare fracture surface.
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2001
- Messages
- 8,474
not sure if I'd give up a beer in the name of knives or not at least not in original form anywaymete said:
Oh pee on it Daniel Koster said:Dan - he's talking about the steel....not the, um, other thing....
dang and I thought Roger was going to spring something on us 
no fun today I don't know how but I missed those last posts (all after asking Pendetive to look for the girl). I must have been at the camp.
Anyhow, I had good and I had not so good and I had what I would consider bad heat treats with the RWL-34. My overall best feeling, not in concrete, is that the rapid air quench is best. My second best feeling is plate quench - BUT only so long as the plates contact all of steel surface faces. It is important to remember or be reminded that that steel was 1/8th thick. In higher thickness I believe the choice between rapid air and oil quench should be considered and on a massive blade such as 3/16 or greater I would choose to oil quench.
Alot, I thought, had to do with not just soak times but also time at preheat. I noticed in that marathon of testing Mete's advise that it is better to over soak a little than under soak a little became apparently true.
RL
Anyhow, I had good and I had not so good and I had what I would consider bad heat treats with the RWL-34. My overall best feeling, not in concrete, is that the rapid air quench is best. My second best feeling is plate quench - BUT only so long as the plates contact all of steel surface faces. It is important to remember or be reminded that that steel was 1/8th thick. In higher thickness I believe the choice between rapid air and oil quench should be considered and on a massive blade such as 3/16 or greater I would choose to oil quench.
Alot, I thought, had to do with not just soak times but also time at preheat. I noticed in that marathon of testing Mete's advise that it is better to over soak a little than under soak a little became apparently true.
RL